ArticleJournal of periodontal & implant science2025
Evaluating the quality and empathy of responses to patient questions on the Korean Academy of Periodontology's online question and answer section: a cross-sectional study comparing periodontists and an AI-powered chatbot.
Article in Journal of periodontal & implant science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- An interdisciplinary framework for artificial intelligence, precision medicine, and ethical governance in periodontal care: a systematic review.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
- Article
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
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate and compare the responses of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered chatbot and professional periodontists to patient queries in periodontology and implantology, using the Korean Academy of Periodontology's (KAP) online question and answer (Q&A) section.
methodsIn this comparative cross-sectional study, we analyzed 219 patient-submitted periodontal and implant knowledge questions from the KAP online Q&A section. A panel of 10 evaluators-5 periodontists and 5 laypersons-rated both the periodontist's and the AI chatbot's responses using standardized scales. We applied the
resultsTen evaluators judged the AI chatbot's responses to be significantly superior in quality and empathy compared to periodontist replies. A higher proportion of periodontist responses fell below acceptable quality ("very poor" or "poor") than chatbot responses (28.7% vs. 15.0%;
conclusionsAI-powered chatbots can deliver more accurate and empathetic answers than human periodontists, suggesting their potential role as consultation assistants merits further investigation. The high intraclass correlation coefficient values (0.79-0.93) indicate a high level of agreement among evaluators in both the periodontist and lay evaluator groups, thus confirming the reliability and robustness of the study's assessment methodology.
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.