PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 14, 202516 citations

The performance of large language models in dentomaxillofacial radiology: a systematic review.

View Full Paper
ZLZhengjun LiuANAndrew NalleyHJHao Jing

Key Points

  • Large language models showed varied performance in diagnosing dental conditions, with accuracy between 37-92.5%.
  • In educational settings, LLMs achieved correctness rates from 33.3-86.1% on qualification exams and questions.
  • Automated radiology report generation demonstrated moderate performance, with accuracy ranging from 70.4-81.3%.
  • Current findings suggest potential for LLMs in dentomaxillofacial radiology, but further validation and standardization are essential.

Abstract

This study aimed to systematically review the current performance of large language models (LLMs) in dento-maxillofacial radiology (DMFR). Five electronic databases were used to identify studies that developed, fine-tuned, or evaluated LLMs for DMFR-related tasks. Data extracted included study purpose, LLM type, images/text source, applied language, dataset characteristics, input and output, performance outcomes, evaluation methods, and reference standards. Customized assessment criteria adapted from the TRIPOD-LLM reporting guideline were used to evaluate the risk-of-bias in the included studies specifically regarding the clarity of dataset origin, the robustness of performance evaluation methods, and the validity of the reference standards. The initial search yielded 1621 titles, and nineteen studies were included. These studies investigated the use of LLMs for tasks including the production and answering of DMFR-related qualification exams and educational questions (n = 8), diagnosis and treatment recommendations (n = 7), and radiology report generation and patient communication (n = 4). LLMs demonstrated varied performance in diagnosing dental conditions, with accuracy ranging from 37-92.5% and expert ratings for differential diagnosis and treatment planning between 3.6-4.7 on a 5-point scale. For DMFR-related qualification exams and board-style questions, LLMs achieved correctness rates between 33.3-86.1%. Automated radiology report generation showed moderate performance with accuracy ranging from 70.4-81.3%. LLMs demonstrate promising potential in DMFR, particularly for diagnostic, educational, and report generation tasks. However, their current accuracy, completeness, and consistency remain variable. Further development, validation, and standardization are needed before LLMs can be reliably integrated as supportive tools in clinical workflows and educational settings.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Liu et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/689fc6852abb084d53ed23d9https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twaf060
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper