# Space Dentistry Combined With Remote and AI Technologies, a Necessity for Long-Term Stays: Thoughts of US Astronauts' Unexpected Stay Researcher: Ge Zhang Chinese name: 张格 ORCID identity anchor: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3116-3246 Canonical researcher: https://drgezhang.com/#person Journal: Oral Diseases Year: 2025 Type: Article DOI: 10.1111/odi.70054 Canonical page: https://drgezhang.com/papers/doi-10-1111-odi-70054.html Markdown record: https://drgezhang.com/papers/doi-10-1111-odi-70054.md ## Full Authors 1. Xufeng Huang 2. Zhengrui Li 3. Qi Wang 4. Ji'an Liu 5. Ge Zhang 6. Runzhi Chen 7. Xuefan Bu 8. Yixi Wang 9. Peng Luo 10. Ling Zhang 11. Andras Hajdu ## Research & review context ### Research fields - Spaceflight oral health - Remote dental care research ### Review topics - Crew dental capability - Adaptation of digital dentistry to spaceflight ### Scientific role Conceptual letter outlining three care strategies and implementation constraints. ### Evidence position Author proposals supported by cited background; no original astronaut or robotics experiment. ### Related concepts - Tele-dentistry - 3D fabrication - Microgravity robotics ### Possible citation contexts - Attribution of the three-part space-dentistry proposal. - Discussion of untested technology adaptations and communication constraints in long-duration missions. Possible literature-review contexts, not evidence of existing citations. Read the findings and Evidence Scope before citing the original article. ## Evidence Base **Space Dentistry Combined With Remote and AI Technologies, a Necessity for Long-Term Stays: Thoughts of US Astronauts' Unexpected Stay** A space-dentistry letter proposes crew training, remote and 3D-enabled care, and adapted AI robotics; it does not test their effectiveness in astronauts or microgravity. | Evidence | Value | | --- | --- | | proposed strategy directions | 3 | | new astronaut or experimental cohort | None | ### Counting note Three counts proposals, not trials, evaluated systems or patient groups. ## Research Question What practical and technological approaches do the authors propose for dental care during prolonged space missions? ## Author Evidence Summary The authors propose three directions: strengthening dental skills within the crew, remotely guided care with virtual and 3D technologies, and adapting AI-driven robotics for autonomous treatment. They acknowledge crew constraints and communication delay or distortion. The letter cites prior literature and a commercial robotics example, but reports no astronaut cohort, microgravity experiment or quantitative evaluation of the proposed systems. ## Key Arguments ### KF1: The letter proposes strengthening onboard dental capability through crew expertise or additional basic dental training. Context: Crew size constrains specialist staffing; this is an operational recommendation without a measured treatment effect. | Evidence | Value | | --- | --- | | strategy position | First of three proposals | Source locator: Online-first typeset text p. 1, paragraph introducing three strategies and describing crew staffing and dental training. ### KF2: The authors propose remotely guided care using virtual interfaces and 3D technology. Context: They explicitly note signal delay and distortion and discuss sensing, communication infrastructure and on-demand fabrication; these are proposed solutions. | Evidence | Value | | --- | --- | | strategy position | Second proposal | | identified constraints | Signal delay and distortion | Source locator: Online-first typeset text pp. 1-2, second strategy across the page break; p. 2 paragraphs on remote guidance and 3D printing. ### KF3: The letter proposes adapting AI-driven dental robotics for space use. Context: A technology prospect illustrated by an external commercial example; no autonomous treatment in microgravity is evaluated in this letter. | Evidence | Value | | --- | --- | | strategy position | Third proposal | | new microgravity validation | None reported | Source locator: Online-first typeset text p. 2, final scientific paragraph on AI-driven robotic systems and adaptation to microgravity. ## Article Scope & Approach ### Article profile - Study Design: Letter proposing space-dentistry care strategies - Evidence Type: Conceptual recommendations drawing on cited literature and technology examples - Diseases Covered: dental emergencies during spaceflight - Translation Scope: Research and operational proposals requiring testing; not validated spaceflight dental care - Evidence domains: crew dental training, remote guidance and fabrication, AI-assisted dental robotics ## What This Article Adds - A three-part agenda for dental capability during prolonged space missions. - Explicit separation of crew, remote-care and robotics proposals from tested clinical performance. ## Evidence Scope ### Supports - Attribution of the three proposed strategies and acknowledged operational constraints. - Discussion of research needs for adapting terrestrial dental technologies to spaceflight. ### Does Not Establish - Improved oral health or fewer mission interruptions in astronauts. - Safe or effective autonomous dental treatment in microgravity. - Validated performance of remote guidance, 3D fabrication or AI robotics during space missions. ### Limitations - The letter offers proposals rather than comparative clinical or engineering validation. - Health concerns and technology examples derive from cited sources, not original observations in this letter. - The reviewed text uses 2025 online-first pagination 1-2; the later issue record is Oral Diseases 32(1), 270-271 (2026). This is recorded as a version-pagination relationship, without changing the site's publication identity. - Full text was read through the ResearchGate HTML rendition of the author-uploaded typeset version; the PDF binary and the later issue PDF were not retrieved. ## When This Article Is Useful to Cite ### CU1: Which three strategies are proposed? Crew dental capability, remotely guided care with virtual and 3D technologies, and adapted AI-driven robotic treatment are proposed. Evidence: [KF1](#kf1), [KF2](#kf2), [KF3](#kf3) ### CU2: Why does crew training appear alongside specialist staffing? The authors recognize limited onboard personnel and propose strengthening basic dental training when dedicated specialist staffing is impractical. Evidence: [KF1](#kf1) ### CU3: What constraints are acknowledged for remote care? The letter identifies signal delay and distortion, and discusses sensing and communications improvements as proposed responses. Evidence: [KF2](#kf2) ## What This Article Should Not Be Cited to Claim - Improved oral health or fewer mission interruptions in astronauts. - Safe or effective autonomous dental treatment in microgravity. - Validated performance of remote guidance, 3D fabrication or AI robotics during space missions. ## Evidence Matrix ### The letter proposes strengthening onboard dental capability through crew expertise or additional basic dental training. - Context: Crew size constrains specialist staffing; this is an operational recommendation without a measured treatment effect. - Finding: strategy position: First of three proposals - Evidence Level: Conceptual recommendations drawing on cited literature and technology examples - Scope: Supports attribution to this correspondence; not a new experiment or independently validated clinical effect. - Source Locator: Online-first typeset text p. 1, paragraph introducing three strategies and describing crew staffing and dental training. - Evidence refs: [KF1](#kf1) ### The authors propose remotely guided care using virtual interfaces and 3D technology. - Context: They explicitly note signal delay and distortion and discuss sensing, communication infrastructure and on-demand fabrication; these are proposed solutions. - Finding: strategy position: Second proposal; identified constraints: Signal delay and distortion - Evidence Level: Conceptual recommendations drawing on cited literature and technology examples - Scope: Supports attribution to this correspondence; not a new experiment or independently validated clinical effect. - Source Locator: Online-first typeset text pp. 1-2, second strategy across the page break; p. 2 paragraphs on remote guidance and 3D printing. - Evidence refs: [KF2](#kf2) ### The letter proposes adapting AI-driven dental robotics for space use. - Context: A technology prospect illustrated by an external commercial example; no autonomous treatment in microgravity is evaluated in this letter. - Finding: strategy position: Third proposal; new microgravity validation: None reported - Evidence Level: Conceptual recommendations drawing on cited literature and technology examples - Scope: Supports attribution to this correspondence; not a new experiment or independently validated clinical effect. - Source Locator: Online-first typeset text p. 2, final scientific paragraph on AI-driven robotic systems and adaptation to microgravity. - Evidence refs: [KF3](#kf3) ## Q&A ### Which three strategies are proposed? Crew dental capability, remotely guided care with virtual and 3D technologies, and adapted AI-driven robotic treatment are proposed. Evidence: KF1, KF2, KF3 ### Why does crew training appear alongside specialist staffing? The authors recognize limited onboard personnel and propose strengthening basic dental training when dedicated specialist staffing is impractical. Evidence: KF1 ### What constraints are acknowledged for remote care? The letter identifies signal delay and distortion, and discusses sensing and communications improvements as proposed responses. Evidence: KF2 ### Were AI dental robots tested in astronauts or microgravity? No. The letter discusses an external technology example and proposes adaptation, without reporting such an experiment. Evidence: KF3 ## Concepts & Entities ### Fields space dentistry ### Methods remote dental guidance, 3D printing, AI-driven robotics ### Concepts crew training, microgravity adaptation, communication delay, dental emergencies ## Related Research - [Multimodal AI for cardiovascular care must learn when not to predict](https://drgezhang.com/papers/doi-10-1016-j-medd-2026-100004.html) — A separate conceptual correspondence on boundaries for clinical AI use; it does not validate dental robotics or spaceflight applications. (DOI: 10.1016/j.medd.2026.100004) ## Publication & Provenance - DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/odi.70054 - Publisher: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/odi.70054 - Doi Url: https://doi.org/10.1111/odi.70054 - Identity Url: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40818111/ - Full Text Url: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394518646 - Evidence Basis: Complete online-first typeset text and references were read from Zhengrui Li's public ResearchGate upload. The eleven-author order, title, DOI and Letter to the Editor designation match the publisher record. Publisher first publication is August 16, 2025; later issue pagination is 270-271. - Version: Online-first Wiley typeset text (2025; 0:1-2), uploaded by Zhengrui Li August 17, 2025; accessed October 26, 2026 in HTML. PDF binary and later issue PDF not retrieved. - Figure Verification: No figure, table or original experimental dataset appears in the reviewed two-page letter. ## Evidence-page notice A conceptual Letter to the Editor, reviewed using its 2025 online-first text. The proposals are not validated clinical or spaceflight technologies. ## Links - DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/odi.70054 - HTML page: https://drgezhang.com/papers/doi-10-1111-odi-70054.html - Google Scholar query: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Space%20Dentistry%20Combined%20With%20Remote%20and%20AI%20Technologies%2C%20a%20Necessity%20for%20Long-Term%20Stays%3A%20Thoughts%20of%20US%20Astronauts%27%20Unexpected%20Stay%22 - ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3116-3246