ArticleBMC oral health2025
Artificial intelligence in pediatric dental trauma: do artificial intelligence chatbots address parental concerns effectively?
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Large Language Model-Based Chatbots for Dental Trauma Management: A Comparative Study Based on Accuracy, Consistency and Information Quality.Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc · 2026Article
- SOS Dental Trauma-An Artificial Intelligence Chatbot via WhatsApp for Guiding Patients After Dental Trauma.Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology · 2026Article
- Is it a Reliable Guide or a Source to be Approached with Caution? GenAI in Parents' Information Search Processes Regarding Their Children.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- ChatGPT in Pediatric Dental Trauma: A Cross-Sectional Assessment of Response Reliability to Parental Queries.Cureus · 2026Article
- Correction: Artificial intelligence in pediatric dental trauma: do artificial intelligence chatbots address parental concerns effectively?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
- Accuracy, quality, and readability analyses of responses from large language models to questions on pediatric dental sedation.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Comparative assessment of AI-generated responses to frequently asked questions by parents on space maintainers in pediatric dentistry.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Performance of artificial intelligence chatbots in the diagnosis and management of simulated dental trauma cases: an evaluation based on IADT guidelines.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-4's performance on pediatric dentistry questions: accuracy and completeness analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study focused on two Artificial Intelligence chatbots, ChatGPT 3.5 and Google Gemini, as the primary tools for answering questions related to traumatic dental injuries. The aim of this study to evaluate the reliability, understandability, and applicability of the responses provided by these chatbots to commonly asked questions from parents of children with dental trauma.
methodsThe case scenarios were developed based on frequently asked questions that parents commonly ask their dentists or Artificial Intelligence chatbots regarding dental trauma in children. The quality and accuracy of the information obtained from the chatbots were assessed using the DISCERN Instrument. The understandability and actionability of the responses obtained from the Artificial Intelligence chatbots were assessed using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printed Materials. In statistical analysis; categorical variables were analyzed in terms of frequency and percentage. For numerical variables, skewness and kurtosis values were calculated to assess normal distribution.
resultsBoth Artificial Intelligence chatbots performed similarly, although Google Gemini provided higher quality and more reliable responses. Based on the mean scores, ChatGPT 3.5 had a higher understandability. Both chatbots demonstrated similar levels of performance in terms of actionability.
conclusionArtificial Intelligence applications can serve as a helpful starting point for parents seeking information and reassurance after dental trauma. However, they should not replace professional dental consultations, as their reliability is not absolute. Parents should use Artificial Intelligence applications as complementary resources and seek timely professional advice for accurate diagnosis and treatment.
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.