Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40158110›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2025

Comparing diagnostic skills in endodontic cases: dental students versus ChatGPT-4o.

Parla Meva Durmazpinar, Ece Ekmekci

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Comparison of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots and Dental Students on Context of Dental Trauma.Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Performance Comparison of a Domain-Specific Chatbot and General-Purpose Chatbots in Dental Traumatology.Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Parla Meva DurmazpinarDepartment of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey. parlamewa@hotmail.com.
Ece EkmekciDepartment of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) technologies have revolutionized fields such as economics, law, and healthcare. Large language models, like ChatGPT, have shown significant potential in dentistry, supporting diagnostic accuracy, treatment planning, and education. However, earlier versions of ChatGPT were limited to text-based data. The latest multimodal model, ChatGPT-4o, introduced in 2024, now processes text, images, audio, and video, enabling broader applications in clinical education. This study evaluates ChatGPT-4o's diagnostic accuracy in endodontic cases, comparing it with dental students' performance. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study included two groups of dental students: 3rd-year and 5th-year, alongside ChatGPT-4o. Participants answered 15 multiple-choice questions designed using radiographs, clinical photographs, and patient histories. These questions, based on the American Association of Endodontists' Clinical Guidelines, were administered via Google Forms for students and ChatGPT-4o. Responses were categorized as correct, incorrect, or unanswered. Data were analyzed statistically.

resultsChatGPT-4o demonstrated a higher accuracy rate and lower error rate compared to students, with 91.4% correct and 8.2% incorrect responses. Third-year students had a correct response rate of 60.8%, while fifth-year students achieved 79.5%. A statistically significant difference was found between the study groups in terms of correct response rates (p < 0.05), with ChatGPT outperforming both student groups (p < 0.001). Additionally, fifth-year students showed a higher correct response rate compared to third-year students.

conclusionChatGPT-4o demonstrates significant potential as a diagnostic support tool in dental education, particularly in endodontics. Its high diagnostic accuracy and consistency highlight its value as an innovative ( application in clinical training and decision-making.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceEducation, DentalEndodonticsStudents, DentalFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansMaleArtificial intelligenceChatGPTDental educationDiagnosisEndodontics

Identifiers

PMID40158110
PMCPMC11955126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.