ArticleJournal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine2026
Large language models approach specialist-level accuracy in dental pain diagnosis: a comparative evaluation of four models.
Article in Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dental pain is the most common chief complaint in oral healthcare and involves multiple disease types. An accurate diagnosis is crucial for treatment decisions. Large language models (LLMs) have great potential for medical diagnosis; however, their accuracy in dental pain diagnosis has not been systematically evaluated. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of four advanced LLMs for dental pain and analyze the key factors affecting diagnostic performance. Methods: A comparative study was conducted using 320 dental pain cases from authoritative sources covering eight disease categories. Four state-of-the-art LLMs were evaluated: DeepSeek-R1, ChatGPT-4o, Claude-3.5 Sonnet, and Gemini Pro 2.0. A blinded evaluation was performed by senior experts. The primary outcome was overall diagnostic accuracy, and the secondary outcomes included performance across disease types, complexity levels, and confidence levels. Results: DeepSeek-R1 achieved the highest diagnostic accuracy (83.8%), followed by ChatGPT-4o (82.8%), with no significant differences. Pulpal disease had the highest accuracy (88.1%), whereas neurological pain had the lowest (59.4%). The case complexity significantly affects the accuracy. The AI models demonstrated significant time advantages, representing a 94.2% faster diagnostic speed than human experts. Conclusion: Latest-generation LLMs, particularly DeepSeek-R1 and ChatGPT-4o, achieved diagnostic levels approaching those of specialist physicians while providing substantial time efficiency gains. These findings support the application of AI in oral medicine by using confidence-based stratified implementation strategies.
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.