ArticleBMC oral health2026
Performance of large language models on undergraduate endodontic multiple-choice questions.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and consistency of responses provided by three large language models (LLMs), ChatGPT-5.2, Gemini-3, and DeepSeek-V3.2, to multiple-choice questions based on undergraduate endodontic education, asked on different days and at different times of the day. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 60 text-based multiple-choice questions were developed across six undergraduate endodontic topics: dental caries, pulpitis, apical periodontitis, periapical abscess, root fracture, and root resorption. Each question was presented to ChatGPT-5.2, Gemini-3, and DeepSeek-V3.2 at three time points per day (morning, afternoon, and evening) over four consecutive days. Accuracy and response consistency were analyzed using SPSS and R software, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05 and a 95% confidence interval.
resultsChatGPT-5.2 and Gemini-3 demonstrated significantly higher accuracy and consistency than DeepSeek-V3.2 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively). Model performance varied according to question category. Accuracy differed significantly across categories for ChatGPT-5.2 and Gemini-3, whereas consistency was influenced by question category only in ChatGPT-5.2. Model performance remained largely stable across different assessment times.
conclusionsAdvanced LLMs demonstrated promising performance in answering undergraduate endodontic multiple-choice questions and may serve as useful adjunctive tools in dental education. However, differences among models and variations in performance across topics highlight the need for critical evaluation of AI-generated responses before their educational use.
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.