Seeing the Gaps: Heatmaps, Metrics, and the Hidden Failures of Explainable AI in Dentomaxillofacial Radiology – A Systematic Review

Abstract Objectives This systematic review aims to evaluate the techniques and reported patterns of heatmap-based visual explanations in deep learning (DL) systems for dental radiographic classification tasks. Methods A literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, IEEE Xplore Library, Oria.no and Google Scholar to retrieve studies using DL for dental classification tasks. Only articles with a visual explanation (heatmap) were selected. Risk of bias assessment was done with QUADAS-2, PROBAST-AI and CEBM. The heatmap technique, reasons for inclusion, explanations provided and patterns were analysed. Results In the 136 studies reviewed, Grad-CAM was the most commonly used technique. The predominant reason for using visual explanations was to understand the decision-making process of the DL model. Some heatmaps reflect established radiographic criteria, while others exhibit unique, label-dependent patterns that sometimes emphasise irrelevant areas. Cropping to the region of interest influences visual explanations. Conclusions Visual explanations seem clinically plausible to domain experts when aligned with domain knowledge, but clinical plausibility does not equal technical faithfulness. Formal faithfulness testing was rarely performed among the included studies. Therefore, explanations should not be assumed to accurately represent the model’s underlying reasoning. Limitations include the evaluation of studies not primarily designed for visual explanation assessment. No funding was received for this review. Authors declare no competing interests. Advances in knowledge Visual explanations, while clinically plausible when aligned with domain knowledge, remain insufficiently validated and should not be assumed to faithfully represent model reasoning. An implausible explanation does not necessarily indicate model failure. Domain/task-specific evaluation metrics for explainable AI in dentomaxillofacial radiology are needed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dentomaxillofacial Radiology
Published
2026-11-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twag074
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

Seeing the Gaps: Heatmaps, Metrics, and the Hidden Failures of Explainable AI in Dentomaxillofacial Radiology – A Systematic Review

Christian Walter Peter Omlin, Georgi Chaltikyan, Martin Wulf Gerdes, Fara Aninha Fernandes
Dentomaxillofacial Radiology
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
article

Seeing the Gaps: Heatmaps, Metrics, and the Hidden Failures of Explainable AI in Dentomaxillofacial Radiology – A Systematic Review

Christian Walter Peter Omlin, Georgi Chaltikyan, Martin Wulf Gerdes, Fara Aninha Fernandes
article en

Abstract

Abstract Objectives This systematic review aims to evaluate the techniques and reported patterns of heatmap-based visual explanations in deep learning (DL) systems for dental radiographic classification tasks. Methods A literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, IEEE Xplore Library, Oria.no and Google Scholar to retrieve studies using DL for dental classification tasks. Only articles with a visual explanation (heatmap) were selected. Risk of bias assessment was done with QUADAS-2, PROBAST-AI and CEBM. The heatmap technique, reasons for inclusion, explanations provided and patterns were analysed. Results In the 136 studies reviewed, Grad-CAM was the most commonly used technique. The predominant reason for using visual explanations was to understand the decision-making process of the DL model. Some heatmaps reflect established radiographic criteria, while others exhibit unique, label-dependent patterns that sometimes emphasise irrelevant areas. Cropping to the region of interest influences visual explanations. Conclusions Visual explanations seem clinically plausible to domain experts when aligned with domain knowledge, but clinical plausibility does not equal technical faithfulness. Formal faithfulness testing was rarely performed among the included studies. Therefore, explanations should not be assumed to accurately represent the model’s underlying reasoning. Limitations include the evaluation of studies not primarily designed for visual explanation assessment. No funding was received for this review. Authors declare no competing interests. Advances in knowledge Visual explanations, while clinically plausible when aligned with domain knowledge, remain insufficiently validated and should not be assumed to faithfully represent model reasoning. An implausible explanation does not necessarily indicate model failure. Domain/task-specific evaluation metrics for explainable AI in dentomaxillofacial radiology are needed.

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology
University of Agder (NO), Pingla Institute (AU), Deggendorf Institute of Technology (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon