Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Aim This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and quality of the answers given by artificial intelligence (AI) applications to the questions directed at tooth deficiency treatments. Materials and methods Fifteen questions asked by patients/ordinary people about missing tooth treatment were selected from the Quora platform. Questions were asked to the ChatGPT-4 (OpenAI Inc., San Francisco, California, United States) and Copilot (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, United States) models. Responses were assessed by two expert physicians using a five-point Likert scale (LS) for accuracy and the Global Quality Scale (GQS) for quality. To assess the internal consistency and inter-rater agreement of ChatGPT-4 and Copilot, Cronbach's alpha, Spearman-Brown's coefficient, and Guttman's split-half coefficient were calculated to measure the reliability and internal consistency of both instruments (α=0.05). Results Copilot showed a mean LS value of 3.83±0.36 and ChatGPT-4 showed a lower mean value of 3.93±0.32. ChatGPT-4's GQS mean value (3.9±0.28) is also higher than Copilot (3.83±0.06) (p<0.001). Conclusion It can be said that AI chatbots gave highly accurate and consistent answers to questions about the treatment of toothlessness. With the ever-developing technology, AI chatbots can be used as consultants for dental treatments in the future.
Aim This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and quality of the answers given by artificial intelligence (AI) applications to the questions directed at tooth deficiency treatments. Materials and methods Fifteen questions asked by patients/ordinary people about missing tooth treatment were selected from the Quora platform. Questions were asked to the ChatGPT-4 (OpenAI Inc., San Francisco, California, United States) and Copilot (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, United States) models. Responses were assessed by two expert physicians using a five-point Likert scale (LS) for accuracy and the Global Quality Scale (GQS) for quality. To assess the internal consistency and inter-rater agreement of ChatGPT-4 and Copilot, Cronbach's alpha, Spearman-Brown's coefficient, and Guttman's split-half coefficient were calculated to measure the reliability and internal consistency of both instruments (α=0.05). Results Copilot showed a mean LS value of 3.83±0.36 and ChatGPT-4 showed a lower mean value of 3.93±0.32. ChatGPT-4's GQS mean value (3.9±0.28) is also higher than Copilot (3.83±0.06) (p<0.001). Conclusion It can be said that AI chatbots gave highly accurate and consistent answers to questions about the treatment of toothlessness. With the ever-developing technology, AI chatbots can be used as consultants for dental treatments in the future.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.