ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek as tools for orthodontic health literacy in public dental education.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to compare and evaluate the accuracy, consistency, and response behavior of ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek in orthodontic health literacy tasks. A total of 50 multiple-choice, text-based questions covering five orthodontic domains were developed using the Delphi method by a panel of five experienced orthodontic professionals. Each question was asked to both models three times daily (morning, noon, evening) over three days, in both English and Chinese versions. Accuracy, consistency, and response time were analyzed using SPSS and R software. The overall accuracy of ChatGPT-4o (90.4%) was slightly higher than that of DeepSeek (88.0%), though the difference was not statistically significant in either English (p = 1.000) or Chinese (p = 0.263). Across individual question groups, no significant differences in accuracy were found between models (p > 0.05). The time of day and testing day had no effect on model performance (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Both models demonstrated similar consistency in their responses (p = 1.000 for English; p = 0.412 for Chinese). However, ChatGPT-4o showed significantly faster response times than DeepSeek in both languages (p < 0.01). Both ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek demonstrate comparable accuracy and consistency in orthodontic health literacy tasks. However, ChatGPT-4o's significantly faster response time makes it more suitable for clinical applications requiring efficient information delivery.
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.