ArticleJournal of dental education2024
Artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, and dental education: Implications for reflective assignments and qualitative research.
Article in Journal of dental education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-informed healthcare pedagogy: a review of the literature and application to pedagogical practice informed by case studies from dental education.British dental journal · 2026Review
- Prompt Framing and Evidence Requirement for AI-Generated Educational Responses in Dental Education: Experimental Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Leveraging AI in Periodontal Reflective Portfolios: A Tool for Learning or a Crutch for Students?European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026Article
- The use and methodological reporting of large language models in qualitative research: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence chatbots in endodontic education-Concepts and potential applications.International endodontic journal · 2026Review
- Applications and potential of ChatGPT in dentistry: Scoping review of research perspectives.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Review
- The reliability of answers from four different AI chatbots on periodontology theoretical exam questions: an evaluation in dental education.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Can educators distinguish between medical student and generative AI-authored reflections?Medical education · 2025Article
- Application of large language models in oral health education: a review of the literature.Canadian journal of dental hygiene : CJDH = Journal canadien de l'hygiene dentaire : JCHD · 2025Review
- Article
- Machine learning in dentistry and oral surgery: charting the course with bibliometric insights.Head & face medicine · 2025Article
- Generative Pre-trained Transformer: Trends, Applications, Strengths and Challenges in Dentistry: A Systematic Review.Healthcare informatics research · 2025Article
- Critical thinking in the age of generative AI: implications for health sciences education.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, and dental education: Implications for reflective assignments and qualitative research.Journal of dental education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionReflections enable students to gain additional value from a given experience. The use of Chat Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT, OpenAI Incorporated) has gained momentum, but its impact on dental education is understudied.
objectivesTo assess whether or not university instructors can differentiate reflections generated by ChatGPT from those generated by students, and to assess whether or not the content of a thematic analysis generated by ChatGPT differs from that generated by qualitative researchers on the same reflections.
methodsHardcopies of 20 reflections (10 generated by undergraduate dental students and 10 generated by ChatGPT) were distributed to three instructors who had at least 5 years of teaching experience. Instructors were asked to assign either 'ChatGPT' or 'student' to each reflection. Ten of these reflections (five generated by undergraduate dental students and five generated by ChatGPT) were randomly selected and distributed to two qualitative researchers who were asked to perform a brief thematic analysis with codes and themes. The same ten reflections were also thematically analyzed by ChatGPT.
resultsThe three instructors correctly determined whether the reflections were student or ChatGPT generated 85% of the time. Most disagreements (40%) happened with the reflections generated by ChatGPT, as the instructors thought to be generated by students. The thematic analyses did not differ substantially when comparing the codes and themes produced by the two researchers with those generated by ChatGPT.
conclusionsInstructors could differentiate between reflections generated by ChatGPT or by students most of the time. The overall content of a thematic analysis generated by the artificial intelligence program ChatGPT did not differ from that generated by qualitative researchers. Overall, the promising applications of ChatGPT will likely generate a paradigm shift in (dental) health education, research, and practice.
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.