ArticleBMC oral health2026
Can artificial intelligence applications be utilised in the management of dental trauma? A comparison of ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of the responses provided by the artificial intelligence applications (chatbots) ChatGPT 4o Plus, Google Gemini Pro, and DeepSeek V3 to questions regarding traumatic dental injuries.
methods14 open-ended questions were prepared to ask the chatbots regarding crown-root fractures, luxation injuries, and avulsion. Each question was asked to each application three times a day for three days. Responses were evaluated using the Global Quality Score (GQS) and modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) scales. Data were analysed using the SPSS programme. The Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used in the evaluation. The significance level was set at p < 0.05.
resultsThe average GQS scores for DeepSeek, ChatGPT, and Google Gemini were 4.26, 4.36, and 4.43, respectively. The mean mDISCERN scores were 3.86, 4.01, and 3.85, respectively. A significant difference was found between the GQS and mDISCERN scores for the chatbots (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the GQS and mDISCERN scores for crown-root fractures (p > 0.05). While there was no significant difference in GQS scores for luxation injuries and avulsion (p > 0.05), a significant difference was found in mDISCERN scores (p < 0.05). Gemini received the highest score for most questions regarding GQS, while ChatGPT received the highest score regarding mDISCERN.
conclusionsThe findings of this study indicate that all three chatbots provide valuable support to dentists in the management of dental trauma. Although chatbots appear to facilitate emergency management in dental trauma, they are still under development, and additional information sources should also be used.
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.