ArticleBMC oral health2025
Can ChatGPT be guide in pediatric dentistry?
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Benchmark of Seven Large Language Models for Traumatic Dental Injury Knowledge.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Can artificial intelligence applications be utilised in the management of dental trauma? A comparison of ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Are chatbots reliable sources of information regarding fluoride in pediatric dentistry?BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Generative Artificial Intelligence and Large Language Models in Paediatric Dentistry: A Scoping Review.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Comparative performance of large language models for patient-oriented support in dental trauma emergencies.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Comparative assessment of quality, consistency, and reference accuracy of MIH-related clinical information generated by ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek R1.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- AI-based decision support in pediatric dentistry: a comparative study of ChatGPT-5 and gemini advanced.BMC oral health · 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
- Comparative assessment of AI-generated responses to frequently asked questions by parents on space maintainers in pediatric dentistry.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Feasibility and exploratory assessment of large language models for pediatric dentistry queries: a comparative study.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- A Scoping Review of Large Language Models in Dental Education: Applications, Challenges, and Prospects.International dental journal · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of dental residents in managing traumatic dental injuries.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the readability, quality, and accuracy of AI chatbot responses to questions about deleterious oral habits.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Can Artificial Intelligence Language Models Effectively Address Dental Trauma Questions?Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology · 2025Observational
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-4's performance on pediatric dentistry questions: accuracy and completeness analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Assessing the Utility of Large Language Models in Guiding Dental Practitioners on Pediatric Patient Care: A Comparative AI Study.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Article
- Dental trauma in children: monitoring, management, and challenges-a narrative review.Translational pediatrics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of ChatGPT in the field of health has recently gained popularity. In the field of dentistry, ChatGPT can provide services in areas such as, dental education and patient education. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality, readability and originality of pediatric patient/parent information and academic content produced by ChatGPT in the field of pediatric dentistry.
methodsA total of 60 questions were asked to ChatGPT for each topic (dental trauma, fluoride, and tooth eruption/oral health) consisting of pediatric patient/parent questions and academic questions. The modified Global Quality Scale (the scoring ranges from 1: poor quality to 5: excellent quality) was used to evaluate the quality of the answers and Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level were used to evaluate the readability. A similarity index was used to compare the quantitative similarity of the answers given by the software with the guidelines and academic references in different databases.
resultsThe evaluation of answers quality revealed an average score of 4.3 ± 0.7 for pediatric patient/parent questions and 3.7 ± 0.8 for academic questions, indicating a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). Academic questions regarding dental trauma received the lowest scores (p < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in readability and similarity between ChatGPT answers for different question groups and topics (p > 0.05).
conclusionsIn pediatric dentistry, ChatGPT provides quality information to patients/parents. ChatGPT, which is difficult to readability for patients/parents and offers an acceptable similarity rate, needs to be improved in order to interact with people more efficiently and fluently.
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.