Background: The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has many applications in the healthcare field. Dental caries is a disease with a prevalence rate of over 50% in Brazil. The diagnosis of caries is usually based on a clinical examination and supplementary tests such as X-rays. The accuracy of a diagnostic test is evaluated by its sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Various algorithms and neural network configurations are being used for caries diagnosis. Objective: This systematic review evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of using deep machine learning through a convolutional neural network in diagnosing dental caries. Methods: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines and registered with Prospero (ID CRD42024411477). We used the PubMed, MEDLINE, and LILACS databases and MeSH and DECs descriptors in the search. Results: After analyzing the eligibility of the articles, we selected 33 for full-text reading and included 13 in the meta-analysis. We used the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy data, and the number of positive and negative tests to generate a 2x2 table with TP, FP, FN, TN rates, and accuracy. We evaluated the heterogeneity of the SROC curve using the Zhou & Dendurkuri I 2 approach. The results showed that the sensitivity and specificity of the machine learning for detecting dental caries were 0.79 and 0.87, respectively, and the AUC of the SROC curve was 0.885. Conclusion: The literature presented a variety of convolutional neural networks [CNN] architecture, image acquisition methods, and training volumes, which could lead to heterogeneity. However, the accuracy of using artificial intelligence for caries diagnosis was high, making it an essential tool for dentistry.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Since this is a systematic review research utilizing secondary data, it did not require approval from the ethics committee

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes