ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2026
Artificial Intelligence Chatbots as Sources of Implant Dentistry Information for the Public: Validity and Reliability Assessment.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI Chatbots vs. Traditional Sources: Dental Health Literacy and Confidence Among Dental Patients-A Cross-Sectional Study.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Large language models in implant dentistry: a scoping review of applications, performance, and limitations.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Informed Consent in AI-Augmented Dentistry and Dental Research: A Scoping Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Evaluating AI Chatbots in Prosthodontics Education: A Quantitative MCQ-Based Assessment.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Feasibility of a multi-metric framework for evaluating patient-facing AI communication in cosmetic dentistry: an exploratory proof-of-concept study.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study assessed the reliability and validity of responses from three chatbot systems-OpenAI's GPT-3.5, Gemini, and Copilot-concerning frequently asked questions (FAQs) in implant dentistry posed by patients. Materials and Methods: Twenty FAQs were prompted to three chatbots in three different times utilizing their respective application programming interfaces. The responses were assessed for validity (low and high threshold) and reliability by two prosthodontic consultants using a five-point Likert scale. Statistical Analysis: The test of normality was utilized using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Differences between different chatbots regarding the quantitative variables in a given (fixed) time point and between the same chatbots in different time points were assessed using Friedman's two-way analysis of variance by ranks, followed by pairwise comparisons. All statistical analyses were conducted using the SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) Version 26.0 software program. Results: GPT-3.5 provided the longest responses, while Gemini was the most concise. All chatbots advised consulting dental professionals more frequently. Validity was high under the low-threshold test but low under the high-threshold test, with Copilot scoring the highest. Reliability was high for all, with Gemini achieving perfect consistency. Conclusion: Chatbots showed consistent and generally valid responses with some variability in accuracy and details. While the chatbots demonstrated a high degree of reliability, their validity-especially under high-threshold criterion-remains limited. Improvements in accuracy and comprehensiveness are necessary for more effective use in providing information about dental implants.
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.