ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2025
Comparative analysis of artificial intelligence chatbots in orthodontic emergency scenarios: ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4.0, Copilot, and Gemini.
Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2025. 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.
- Artificial intelligence in orthodontics: clinical maturity, evidence gaps, and emerging applications-a narrative review.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Review
- Accuracy and Temporal Consistency of ChatGPT and Gemini in Responding to Textbook and Patient-Oriented Dental Bleaching Questions: A Multi-Session Comparative Study.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Patient Facing AI Chatbots in Digital Orthodontic Education: A Comparative Evaluation of Understandability, Actionability, Quality, and Safety of Dietary Advice.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Role-based evaluation of artificial intelligence chatbot responses in orthodontic emergency scenarios: accuracy, readability, understandability, and patient-oriented communication.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Generative Artificial Intelligence-driven orthodontic education practices.BMC medical education · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate and compare the accuracy of four AI chatbots, ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4.0, Copilot, and Gemini, in response to orthodontic emergency scenarios. Materials and Methods: Forty frequently asked questions related to orthodontic emergencies were posed to the chatbots. These questions were categorized as fixed orthodontic treatment, clear aligner treatment, eating and oral hygiene, pain and discomfort, general concerns, retention, and sports and travel. The responses were evaluated by three orthodontic experts using a five-point Likert scale, and statistical analysis was conducted to assess variations in accuracy across chatbots. Results: Statistical analysis revealed significant differences among the chatbots. Gemini and ChatGPT-4.0 demonstrated the highest accuracy in response to orthodontic emergencies, followed by Copilot, whereas ChatGPT-3.5 had the lowest accuracy scores. Additionally, the "Fixed Orthodontic Treatment" category showed a statistically significant difference (P = .043), with Gemini outperforming the other chatbots in this category. However, no statistically significant differences were found in other categories. Conclusions: AI chatbots show potential in providing immediate assistance for orthodontic emergencies, but their accuracy varies across different models and question categories.
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.