ArticleJMIR medical education2024
Evaluation of ChatGPT's Real-Life Implementation in Undergraduate Dental Education: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
53 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of deep machine learning in dental education: a systematic review of effectiveness in dental students' teaching learning outcomes.Evidence-based dentistry · 2026Pooled it
- The impact of generative artificial intelligence on clinical skills and knowledge acquisition in medical undergraduates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- The impact of generative AI on health professional education: A systematic review in the context of student learning.Medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of generative artificial intelligence-based teaching versus traditional teaching methods in medical education: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Can Large Language Models Serve as Reliable Tools for Information in Dentistry? A Systematic Review.International dental journal · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of artificial intelligence-assisted personalized feedback on radiographic diagnostic performance of dental students: a controlled study.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Generative AI-Assisted Progressive-Disclosure Case-Based Learning for Clinical Reasoning in Occupational Medicine: Quasi-Experimental Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Multimodal Large Language Models for Dental Chart Image Interpretation: Cross-Sectional Benchmarking Study With Students and Clinicians.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- DentalEdu-AI graph: mapping evidence-grounded and knowledge-structured AI for dental education, assessment, and accuracy.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating Dental Students' Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Driven Large Language Models in Education in Saudi Arabia.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence chatbots in endodontic education-Concepts and potential applications.International endodontic journal · 2026Review
- Global Trends in the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Dental Education: A Bibliometric Analysis.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- Performance of 4 artificial intelligence chatbots in responding to multiple choice questions in operative dentistry.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of GPT-5 in Periodontitis Staging and Grading: Retrospective Observational Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Observational
- AI in the Classroom: Observing Preclinical Students' Use of ChatGPT During Case-Based Learning at a UK Medical School.The clinical teacher · 2026Article
- Performance of Enhanced Large Language Models on Prosthodontic Multiple-Choice Questions.International dental journal · 2026Article
- An Exploratory Evaluation of GPT-5 in Periodontitis Staging and Grading Using Published Clinical Cases.Research square · 2026Article
- Psychological Inclinations and Practical Utility of ChatGPT Among Undergraduate Dental Students at a Dental School in Karachi: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Generative Artificial Intelligence: Applications and Future Prospects in Dentistry.International dental journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe recent artificial intelligence tool ChatGPT seems to offer a range of benefits in academic education while also raising concerns. Relevant literature encompasses issues of plagiarism and academic dishonesty, as well as pedagogy and educational affordances; yet, no real-life implementation of ChatGPT in the educational process has been reported to our knowledge so far.
objectiveThis mixed methods study aimed to evaluate the implementation of ChatGPT in the educational process, both quantitatively and qualitatively.
methodsIn March 2023, a total of 77 second-year dental students of the European University Cyprus were divided into 2 groups and asked to compose a learning assignment on "Radiation Biology and Radiation Protection in the Dental Office," working collaboratively in small subgroups, as part of the educational semester program of the Dentomaxillofacial Radiology module. Careful planning ensured a seamless integration of ChatGPT, addressing potential challenges. One group searched the internet for scientific resources to perform the task and the other group used ChatGPT for this purpose. Both groups developed a PowerPoint (Microsoft Corp) presentation based on their research and presented it in class. The ChatGPT group students additionally registered all interactions with the language model during the prompting process and evaluated the final outcome; they also answered an open-ended evaluation questionnaire, including questions on their learning experience. Finally, all students undertook a knowledge examination on the topic, and the grades between the 2 groups were compared statistically, whereas the free-text comments of the questionnaires were thematically analyzed.
resultsOut of the 77 students, 39 were assigned to the ChatGPT group and 38 to the literature research group. Seventy students undertook the multiple choice question knowledge examination, and examination grades ranged from 5 to 10 on the 0-10 grading scale. The Mann-Whitney U test showed that students of the ChatGPT group performed significantly better (P=.045) than students of the literature research group. The evaluation questionnaires revealed the benefits (human-like interface, immediate response, and wide knowledge base), the limitations (need for rephrasing the prompts to get a relevant answer, general content, false citations, and incapability to provide images or videos), and the prospects (in education, clinical practice, continuing education, and research) of ChatGPT.
conclusionsStudents using ChatGPT for their learning assignments performed significantly better in the knowledge examination than their fellow students who used the literature research methodology. Students adapted quickly to the technological environment of the language model, recognized its opportunities and limitations, and used it creatively and efficiently. Implications for practice: the study underscores the adaptability of students to technological innovations including ChatGPT and its potential to enhance educational outcomes. Educators should consider integrating ChatGPT into curriculum design; awareness programs are warranted to educate both students and educators about the limitations of ChatGPT, encouraging critical engagement and responsible use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.