ArticleScientific reports2026
A comparative analysis of the performance of large Language models in the dentistry specialty examination.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- DentalEdu-AI graph: mapping evidence-grounded and knowledge-structured AI for dental education, assessment, and accuracy.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- A comparative analysis of large language models for providing oral cavity cancer information.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Cognitive-level analysis of dentomaxillofacial radiology questions in the Turkish dentistry specialization examination: a Bloom's revised taxonomy analysis.BMC oral health · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, the rapid developments in artificial intelligence have also influenced dental education. Large Language Models (LLMs) have become increasingly accessible through publicly available chatbots and are now being used in both medical and dental training. LLMs, which have attracted significant attention across various domains, are currently being utilized in medical and dental education.The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of LLM-based chatbots using questions from the Dentistry Specialization Entrance Examination (DUS), which is administered in Türkiye to assess the knowledge level of dental graduates. A total of 208 multiple-choice DUS questions were answered by seven LLMs. Data were analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistical methods, and a significance level of p < 0.05 was applied. Among the evaluated models, ChatGPT 4.0 achieved the highest accuracy (91.3%), followed by Copilot (87%) and Gemini (86.1%). ChatGPT 4.0 performed significantly better than all other LLMs (p < 0.05). In the image-based questions, the strongest performers were ChatGPT 4.0, Gemini, and Copilot, each achieving an accuracy rate of 63.6%. Although LLMs contribute substantially to dental education, their accuracy limitations in specific domains indicate that they should be used as complementary tools rather than standalone decision-makers.
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.