ArticleOdontology2026
Prompt engineering shapes diagnostic accuracy and explanation quality of LLM in oral lesion diagnosis: a prospective, expert-blinded benchmark study.
Article in Odontology, 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.
- Educational gaps and factors associated with artificial intelligence adoption among Egyptian periodontists: a multicenter cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Adverse Oral Mucosal Reaction to Sublingual Captopril: A Case Report With Exploratory Insights Into AI-Assisted Clinical Reasoning.Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric DentistryArticle
- Adverse Oral Mucosal Reaction to Sublingual Captopril: A Case Report With Exploratory Insights Into AI-Assisted Clinical Reasoning.Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate how different prompting strategies influence the diagnostic accuracy, stability, and interpretability of a multimodal large language model (LLM) (ChatGPT-5.1) in oral lesion assessment and to introduce the Prompt Performance Index (PPI), a novel robustness metric that quantifies the performance stability across clinically relevant subgroups. A total of 300 biopsy-confirmed clinical vignettes were assessed using three distinct prompting strategies: a Context-Focused Prompt (CFP), an Evidence-Guided Prompt (EGP), and a Consistency-Optimized Prompt (COP). Diagnostic accuracy (Top-1 and Top-3), confidence calibration, explanation quality, and computational efficiency were compared. The PPI, defined as mean diagnostic accuracy penalized by variability across subgroups, was developed to characterize robustness across diagnostic difficulty tiers and lesion categories. Multivariable regression models examined the independent effects of prompt structure, case difficulty, and lesion type. COP achieved the highest numerical Top-1 accuracy (72.0%) and the greatest performance stability across difficulty levels and lesion categories. Confidence calibration and explanation quality were also superior for COP (p < 0.0001). Multivariable regression analysis confirmed that both prompt design and diagnostic difficulty significantly influenced model accuracy. The PPI differentiated prompting strategies by revealing variation in diagnostic performance stability not captured by accuracy metrics alone, with COP yielding the highest PPI values under both Top-1 and Top-3 performance. Prompt engineering meaningfully affects multimodal LLM diagnostic behavior in oral medicine. The proposed PPI provides a novel and clinically interpretable framework for evaluating diagnostic robustness across heterogeneous clinical conditions, complementing conventional accuracy-based assessments and enabling more dependable diagnostic workflows with AI assistance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41966636What 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.