SynthesisInternational dental journal2026
Accuracy of Large Language Models in Answering Dental Examination Questions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in International dental journal, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLarge language models (LLMs), including OpenAI's GPT family accessed via interfaces such as ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot, as well as non-GPT systems such as Google Gemini, are increasingly applied in healthcare and dental education. However, the accuracy of these systems in specialized tasks such as answering dental examination questions remains unclear.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated LLM performance in answering dental questions. Databases searched were PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Data on question type and number, LLM versions, and accuracy rates were extracted. Pooled accuracy was estimated using a random-effects model; heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed.
resultsA total of 39 studies were included, with ChatGPT-4 being the most frequently evaluated model. The pooled accuracy for LLMs was 63.7% (95% CI: 60.3%-67.1%), with high heterogeneity (I² = 91.5%). Subgroup analysis revealed ChatGPT-4 and Copilot (a GPT-based interface) achieved the highest pooled accuracies (∼73% and ∼75%, respectively). Direct comparisons confirmed ChatGPT-4 significantly outperformed earlier versions and some competitor models. Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of findings.
conclusionLLMs demonstrate moderate accuracy in answering dental examination questions and are currently insufficient for autonomous clinical decision-making. When their limitations are explicitly recognized, however, these systems may serve as valuable adjuncts in dental education and examination preparation. Methodological strategies such as structured prompting and retrieval-augmented approaches warrant further investigation but were not the primary focus of the present analysis.
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.