ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2026
AI-Powered Clinical Decision Support in Dentistry: Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models for Oral Medicine and Periodontal Diagnosis.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2026. 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.
- Large Language Models and Retrieval-Augmented Platforms for the Diagnosis and Management of Periodontal Diseases: A Blinded Expert-Rated Comparative Study of 11 Systems.Journal of clinical periodontology · 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
BACKGROUND This study evaluates the diagnostic performance of 3 prominent artificial intelligence (AI)-powered large language models (LLMs) - ChatGPT, Copilot, and Gemini - as AI assistants for the diagnosis of oral lesions and periodontal conditions using comprehensive statistical analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrograde study was conducted on 385 cases with definite diagnoses from the College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Saudi Arabia. Clinical and radiographic images were presented to each AI model, and the diagnostic performance of the LLMs was evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale across 8 criteria: diagnostic concordance, time efficiency, ease of use, clarity of explanation, comprehensiveness, ability to answer questions, reliability, and diagnostic range. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics with 95% confidence intervals, Friedman tests, post-hoc pairwise comparisons, correlation analysis, effect size calculations, and reliability assessment using Cronbach's alpha. RESULTS ChatGPT demonstrated superior performance with an overall score of 4.846±0.075, followed by Copilot (4.433±0.163) and Gemini (4.234±0.088). Friedman tests revealed statistically significant differences across all evaluation criteria (P<0.001). Post-hoc analyses showed ChatGPT significantly outperformed both Gemini and Copilot in all criteria. Internal consistency was excellent for all systems (Cronbach alpha: 0.801-0.911). CONCLUSIONS The LLMs, particularly ChatGPT, demonstrate significant potential as reliable AI assistants for oral and periodontal diagnosis. The comprehensive statistical analysis confirms the superior performance of ChatGPT across multiple evaluation dimensions, supporting its potential integration into clinical practice.
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.