ArticleJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2026
Accuracy and Temporal Consistency of ChatGPT and Gemini in Responding to Textbook and Patient-Oriented Dental Bleaching Questions: A Multi-Session Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study compared the accuracy and temporal consistency of ChatGPT and Gemini in responding to dental bleaching questions across three weekly sessions. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 280 true/false questions were developed comprising 200 textbook-based and 80 patient-oriented frequently asked questions. Both chatbots were queried weekly under controlled conditions. Accuracy was compared using generalized estimating equations, consistency was assessed using Fleiss' kappa, and weekly stability was evaluated using Cochran's Q test. Open-ended responses were scored for quality and misinformation by two evaluators.
resultsFor textbook questions, ChatGPT achieved significantly higher accuracy than Gemini (77.7% versus 70.5%, p = 0.0009). For frequently asked questions, both chatbots performed comparably (92.9% versus 90.8%, p = 0.252). Temporal consistency was only fair for textbook questions but almost perfect for frequently asked questions in both chatbots. Both chatbots showed significant upward trends in textbook accuracy across sessions. Gemini received higher global quality scores for open-ended responses, while misinformation rates were similarly low.
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this study, ChatGPT achieved significantly higher accuracy than Gemini for textbook-based dental bleaching questions, while both chatbots performed comparably for patient-oriented questions. Temporal consistency differed markedly, with almost perfect consistency for patient-oriented questions and only fair consistency for textbook-based questions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Chatbot responses to common patient questions about dental bleaching are generally accurate and consistent, but their reliability drops substantially for specialized academic content, suggesting these tools should complement rather than replace professional clinical judgment.
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.