ArticleBMC oral health2026
Diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT and teledentistry compared with dentist examination in detecting dental caries: preliminary diagnostic accuracy study.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDental caries is a common oral health problem globally, necessitating accurate and accessible diagnostic approaches. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT (AI-based assessment) and teledentistry with the clinical dental examination as the clinical reference standard for detecting dental caries. METHODOLOGY: A diagnostic accuracy study was conducted on a sample of 40 tooth images, determined through power analysis. Standardized smartphone images were obtained and assessed independently using two approaches: ChatGPT-based analysis and teledentistry evaluation by dental professionals. The findings from both methods were compared to clinical examination results. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC). Agreement with the clinical reference standard was assessed using Cohen's kappa coefficient, while the McNemar test was used to assess systematic differences between paired classifications.
resultsTeledentistry showed numerically higher diagnostic performance than ChatGPT across all evaluated parameters. It achieved higher sensitivity (89.5% vs. 78.9%), specificity (85.7% vs. 66.7%), PPV (85% vs. 68.2%), NPV (90% vs. 77.8%), and overall accuracy (87.5% vs. 72.5%). Additionally, teledentistry showed a higher AUC (0.876) compared to ChatGPT (0.728), suggesting better discriminative ability. Both methods showed no statistically significant differences from the clinical reference standard; however, ChatGPT exhibited greater inconsistency.
conclusionTeledentistry demonstrated higher diagnostic accuracy and agreement with the clinical reference standard than ChatGPT in this preliminary study and may serve as a reliable diagnostic adjunct, particularly in remote settings. However, further refinement and validation of AI-based tools such as ChatGPT are necessary to improve diagnostic performance, with future research focusing on optimizing image quality and expanding datasets to enhance AI reliability.
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.