ArticleBMC oral health2025
Comparison of chatbots' accuracy in endodontics questions in dentistry specialization exam in Türkiye: ChatGPT-4o, Gemini Advanced, Copilot, and Claude.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of large language models in the Turkish dental specialization examination (DUS): a multidimensional evaluation across disciplines and question formats.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Information Quality and Semantic Stability of AI Chatbot Responses to Complete Denture Questions: A Turkish-English Benchmarking Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Large language models and generative artificial intelligence in endodontics: a scoping review.Odontology · 2026Review
- Cognitive-level analysis of dentomaxillofacial radiology questions in the Turkish dentistry specialization examination: a Bloom's revised taxonomy analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Cognitive alignment and assessment validity in a high-stakes dental specialty examination: a Bloom's taxonomy-based analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Article
- Accuracy and response repeatability of three large language models on undergraduate operative dentistry multiple-choice questions.Frontiers in dental medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of various chatbots (ChatGPT-4o, Gemini Advanced, Microsoft Copilot, and Claude) on endodontic questions in the Turkish Dentistry Specialization Exam (DUS) based on topic, year, and Bloom’s taxonomy. Additionally, the study aimed to contribute to the use of artificial intelligence chatbots as a supplementary learning tool by evaluating their reliability and limitations in dental education.
methodsThe accuracy rates of ChatGPT-4o, Gemini Advanced, Microsoft Copilot, and Claude were assessed using 122 endodontic questions from the DUS between 2012 and 2021. Each question was given to the chatbots in a new chat. Accuracy rates were compared based on year, topic, and Bloom’s taxonomy.
resultsThe accuracy rates of the chatbots were similar: 82.8% for ChatGPT-4o, 83.6% for Gemini Advanced, 77.9% for Copilot, and 82.8% for Claude. Additionally, the accuracy of Copilot and Claude was significantly higher during 2012–2015 compared to 2016–2021 (p = 0.020; p = 0.018). According to Bloom’s taxonomy, ChatGPT-4o, Copilot, and Claude showed higher accuracy in 2012–2015 than in 2016–2021 on low-level questions (p = 0.040; p = 0.011; p = 0.005).
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this study, chatbots showed similar overall accuracy and performed better on earlier exams.
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.