In KSA, numerous studies are conducted to measure the prevalence of dental caries. However, the prevalence of dental caries varies in KSA. This systematic review aims to improve the understanding of the prevalence of dental caries among adults and children residing in KSA. Online databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched. The Saudi Dental Journal was hand-searched. Study selection and data extraction were conducted in duplicate. The studies on dental caries in the Saudi population were included. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the selected studies. Finally, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Forty-nine cross-sectional studies were identified. Areas of weakness in study design/conduct were low response rates, reliable outcome measurement, and identification and handling of confounding factors. Statistical pooling of data was not appropriate due to substantial heterogeneity, also in part to a variation in geographical location and the target population. Twenty-nine studies presented data for primary dentition. The proportion of dental caries among primary teeth ranged from 0.21 to 1.00. Eighteen studies presented data for permanent dentition. The proportion of dental caries across permanent teeth ranged from 0.05 to 0.99. In general, the methodological quality of the included studies was poor. Dental caries proportion level ranged from 0.05 to 0.99 in permanent teeth, and 0.21 to 1.00 across primary teeth. The available data does not provide a complete assessment of dental caries across KSA. Existing studies are limited in terms of the populations studied for dental caries.

Evaluation of the quality of dental information produced by the ChatGPT artificial intelligence language model within the context of oral surgery, preventive dentistry, and oral cancer. This study adopted quantitative methods approach. The experts prepared 50 questions (including dimensions of, risk factors, preventive measures, diagnostic methods, and treatment options) that would be presented to ChatGPT, and its responses were rated for their accuracy, completeness, relevance, clarity or comprehensibility, and possible risks using a standardized rubric. To carry out the assessment of the responses by ChatGPT, a standardized scoring rubric was used. Evaluation process included feedback concerning the strengths, weaknesses, and potential areas of improvement in the responses provided by ChatGPT. While achieving the highest score for preventive dentistry at 4.3/5 and being able to communicate the complex information coherently, the tool showed lower accuracy for oral surgery and oral cancer, scoring 3.9/5 and 3.6/5, respectively, with several gaps for post-operative instructions, personalized risk assessments, and specialized diagnostic methods. Potential risks, such as a lack of individualized advice, were shown in 53% of the oral cancer and in 40% of the oral surgery. While showing promise in some domains, ChatGPT had important limitations in specialized areas that require nuanced expertise. The findings point to the need for professional supervision while using AI-generated information and ongoing evaluation as capabilities evolve, for the assurance of responsible implementation in the best interest of patient care.

In order to improve the understanding of dental fluorosis prevalence in Saudi Arabia and have a good idea of the quality of the studies that have been conducted, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the prevalence of dental fluorosis among people who live in Saudi Arabia. Online databases EMBASE and MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched, without any restriction regarding age. In addition, there were no study design filters applied to the search engine. Study selection and data extraction were conducted in duplicate. Studies were included if they were conducted in Saudi Arabia on any population (adults and children) and collected dental fluorosis data. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Seven cross-sectional studies were identified. Areas of weakness in study design/conduct were low response rates, and identification and handling of confounding factors. Statistical pooling of data was not appropriate due to substantial heterogeneity, due in part to variation in sample size, variation of water fluoridation concentration, index used, targeted population and age group. Seven studies present dental fluorosis at any level. The proportion of dental fluorosis prevalence at any level ranged from 0.00 to 0.91. Six studies explored the prevalence of dental fluorosis of aesthetic-only level of concern. The proportion of dental fluorosis in this category ranged from 0.07 to 0.76. The proportion of dental fluorosis at any level ranged from 0.00 to 0.91 and fluorosis at aesthetics level ranged from 0.07 to 0.76. However, current data does not provide a complete assessment of dental fluorosis across Saudi Arabia. Existing studies are limited in terms of the population covered. The included studies had methodological flaws.

Identify the existing evidence base with regards to interventions that address high levels of dental caries. A discussion of the applicability of the evidence to possible replication in Saudi Arabia is presented, alongside recommendations to help reduce dental caries rates in children in Saudi Arabia. A comprehensive systematic review following PRISMA methods was conducted using three databases: MEDLINE via OVID; EMBASE via OVID and Cochrane Library. Studies were included according to inclusion criteria. AMSTAR2 was used to assess the quality of the included studies, while GRADE was used to assess the quality of evidence. Ten studies were included in this review. The quality of these were ‘high’ (in two review), moderate (in two studies), low (in one study) and to ‘critically low’ (5 reviews). The quality of the evidence presented by the reviews ranged from ‘moderate’ to ‘very low’. The interventions methods included MI, one-to-one nutrition advice, educational interventions and dental screening. The applicability of the findings in relation to dental care in Saudi Arabia is discussed and summarized in a narrative. No strong evidence that supported interventions to improve the child oral health in Saudi Arabia was found. None of the included reviews included studies conducted in Saudi Arabia or evaluated interventions among the local community. As for different culture values, norms, beliefs and attitude to those demographics explored in the reviews, it is unclear if interventions with improve oral health among Saudi children. Further research is needed to explore the efficacy of these interventions in a Saudi context.

This study aimed to investigate dental anxiety levels among adults with cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) and compare to adults with no orofacial cleft. The study also intended to find out the impact of cleft severity, gender and age on the perceived dental anxiety. The study was composed of a sample of 70 adult participants who received and completed dental treatments. After sending self-addressed envelopes with consent forms and Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS) to 192 potential participants, 35 participants with CL/P (CL/P group) and 35 participants with no CL/P (control group), agreed to participate. Data were analysed using Mann–Whitney U test. A two-tailed P-value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. 54.3% of adults with CL/P (23 females and 12 males, age range from 16 to 72 years) reported normal dental anxiety, while the remaining 45.7% reported moderate dental anxiety. No extreme dental anxiety were recorded in the CL/P group. These results were similar to the control group and there were no significant differences between groups (p > 0.05). Female participants recorded higher median anxiety scores than male participants in the CL/P group, and participants with cleft lip had higher median scores than participants with cleft lip and palate. However, these were not statistically significant. The results suggest that CL/P did not affect dental anxiety levels for participants with the CL/P as there were no extreme cases and their results were comparable to a general non-cleft sample.

Robust evidence-based guidelines are important in everyday clinical practice, especially when delivering and managing oral care needs to a vulnerable group such as children with special healthcare needs (SHCNs). Methods: To assess the quality of guidelines on the management of oral care for children with special healthcare needs (SHCNs) and to find appropriate guidelines, an electronic search of MEDLINE Ovid was carried out alongside an additional search of common guideline websites. The AGREE II tool was used to assess the quality of the guidelines. Assessment was undertaken independently by three assessors. Furthermore, the underlying evidence used to formulate recommendations in the identified guidelines was qualitatively assessed. Results: There were nine guidelines, with 41 recommendations, that met the eligibility criteria. The quality of the guidelines was generally found to be poor. Only one guideline was assessed as “recommended” by the assessors, based on the quality of the methods, the reporting, or both. Only 2 of the 41 sets of recommendations, made across the nine guidelines, were judged to be valid and based on a rigorous systematic review of the evidence. Conclusions: The current state of guidelines on oral care management for children with special healthcare needs (SHCNs) is, on the whole, of very low quality. The scientific community should work together to enhance the quality and strength of the current clinical guidelines and to ensure that they are trustworthy prior to implementation.