ArticleScientific reports2025
Prompt-dependent performance of multimodal AI model in oral diagnosis: a comprehensive analysis of accuracy, narrative quality, calibration, and latency versus human experts.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of topical erythropoietin gel and mouthwash for recurrent aphthous stomatitis in a randomized clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Multimodal large language models for bladder tumor detection in cystoscopy: a retrospective benchmarking study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Accuracy and Error Patterns of References Generated by Large Language Models in Endodontics: The Role of Prompt Design and Model Selection.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Trajectory-aware risk stratification of oral lichen planus using a multimodal large language model: a longitudinal diagnostic accuracy study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Prompt Framing and Evidence Requirement for AI-Generated Educational Responses in Dental Education: Experimental Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Diagnostic and localization performance of multimodal large language models in the interpretation of dental periapical radiographs.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Bi-linguistic performance of large language models in multimodal analysis for differentiating jawbone-destroying malignancy from osteomyelitis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Prompt engineering shapes diagnostic accuracy and explanation quality of LLM in oral lesion diagnosis: a prospective, expert-blinded benchmark study.Odontology · 2026Article
- Integrated assessment of a leadership course for premedical students: exploring the interprofessional education from selective collaboration with nursing students.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Clinical and Patient Comparison of AI and Expert Digital Smile Design: A Prospective Paired Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Accuracy of Autism-Related TikTok Information in Italian: A Comparison Between Human Raters and Large Language Models.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Versus Human Dental Expertise in Diagnosing Periapical Pathosis on Periapical Radiographs: A Multicenter Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Calibration of AI large language models with human subject matter experts for grading of clinical short-answer responses in dental education.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- A Multimodal Large Language Model Framework for Clinical Subtyping and Malignant Transformation Risk Prediction in Oral Lichen Planus: A Paired Comparison With Expert Clinicians.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Applicability of Advanced Large Language Models in Laboratory Medicine Test Questions: A Comparative Performance Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- Multimodal large language models for oral lesion diagnosis: a systematic review of diagnostic performance and clinical utility.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Aesthetic Outcomes Following Botulinum Toxin Treatment Using Multimodal Large Language Models: A Paired Before-and-After Analysis.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
- Oral health-related quality of life in head and neck cancer survivors in Egypt within the first year after radiotherapy: a multivariable analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Vision-based diagnostic gain of ChatGPT-5 and gemini 2.5 pro compared with human experts in oral lesion assessment.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Impact of Patient Communication Style on Agentic AI-Generated Clinical Advice in E-Medicine.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prompt design is a critical yet underexplored factor influencing the diagnostic performance of large language models (LLMs). Gemini Pro 2.5 shows promise in multimodal reasoning, but no prior study has systematically compared prompt structures in oral datasets against expert benchmarks. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a multimodal LLM (Gemini Pro 2.5) under different prompting strategies compared with oral medicine experts using prospective, histopathology-verified clinical vignettes. In a prospective, paired diagnostic accuracy study, Gemini pro 2.5 (a multimodal LLM) was evaluated under three prompting strategies: Direct (P-1), Chain-of-Thought (P-2), and Self-Reflection (P-3) on 300 oral lesion cases with histopathologic confirmation. Each prompt was applied to identical inputs and compared against diagnoses from board-certified oral medicine specialists. Accuracy, rubric-based narrative quality, probability calibration, and computational efficiency were assessed under STARD-AI guidelines. Human experts achieved the highest Top-1 accuracy (61%), but Chain-of-Thought prompting (P-2) led AI performance in Top-3 accuracy (82%) and produced the highest explanation quality (mean rubric score 8.49/10). No AI prompt matched human performance in low-difficulty cases. P-2 also showed the best calibration (Brier score 0.238) compared to P-1 and P-3. Resource-wise, Direct prompting was fastest, but longer outputs modestly improved Top-3 recall. Mixed-effects modeling confirmed that AI performance varied significantly by prompt structure, highlighting context-specific trade-offs. Prompt structure significantly affects the diagnostic performance and interpretability of AI-generated differentials in oral lesion diagnosis. While expert clinicians remain superior in straightforward cases, structured prompting, particularly Chain-of-Thought, may enhance AI reliability in complex diagnostic scenarios. These findings support the integration of prompt engineering into AI-assisted diagnostic tools to augment clinical decision-making in oral medicine.
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.