Trial reportBMC oral health2025
Evaluating the impact of AI-generated educational content on patient understanding and anxiety in endodontics and restorative dentistry: a comparative study.
Trial report 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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Applications of artificial intelligence in endodontic education: a systematic review.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Do bots provide correct and adequate guidance regarding acidity: A blinded comparison rated by patients and physicians.World journal of methodology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- AI-Augmented Teach-Back in Dentistry: From Patient Education to Verified Clinical Understanding.Cureus · 2026Review
- Digital patient education and its role in overcoming dental anxiety and barriers to endodontic care.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Evaluating large language models for endodontic case difficulty assessment: accuracy, consistency, temporal stability, and agreement.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- ChatGPT for diabetes education: potential, accuracy, and accessibility in patient support.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of a Mobile Application with an AI-Powered Chatbot to Enhance Nursing Students' Awareness of Substance Abuse Prevention: An Interventional Study.F1000Research · 2026Article
- Application of artificial intelligence in oral health management: challenges and opportunities.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluation of an Intraoral Camera with an AI-Based Application for the Detection of Gingivitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
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
backgroundEffective patient education is critical in enhancing treatment outcomes and reducing anxiety in dental procedures. This study compares the effectiveness of AI-generated educational materials with traditional methods in improving patient comprehension and reducing anxiety during endodontic and restorative dental treatments.
methodsA cross-sectional, comparative study was conducted with 100 participants undergoing restorative or endodontic procedures. Patients were randomized into two groups: those receiving AI-generated instructional materials (via ChatGPT) and those receiving traditional education (verbal explanations and pamphlets). Baseline knowledge and post-intervention knowledge retention were assessed using structured tests. Patient perceptions of clarity, usefulness, comprehensiveness, trust, and anxiety were measured using Likert-scale surveys. Three dental experts evaluated the educational content for accuracy and suitability. Statistical analysis included t-tests and Cohen's kappa to measure inter-rater reliability.
resultsAI-generated materials significantly outperformed traditional methods in all measured dimensions, including clarity (4.42 vs. 3.25), usefulness (4.63 vs. 3.50), comprehensiveness (4.50 vs. 3.29), trust (4.00 vs. 2.96), and anxiety reduction (mean anxiety score: 2.63 vs. 3.38, p < 0.001). Pre- and post-intervention knowledge assessments revealed substantial knowledge improvement in the AI group. Expert evaluations confirmed the accuracy and suitability of AI-generated materials, with high inter-rater reliability (κ = 0.75, p < 0.001).
conclusionsAI-generated educational materials demonstrate superior effectiveness in improving patient comprehension and reducing anxiety compared to traditional methods. Their integration into dental practice could enhance patient satisfaction and streamline the educational process, particularly for complex or anxiety-inducing procedures. Future research should explore their application in diverse dental specialties and assess long-term impacts on patient behavior and clinical outcomes.
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.