Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Performance of <scp>AI</scp> ‐Chatbots to Common Temporomandibular Joint Disorders ( <scp>TMDs</scp> ) Patient Queries: Accuracy, Completeness, Reliability and Readability
6
Zitationen
5
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
TMDs are a common group of conditions affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) often resulting from factors like injury, stress or teeth grinding. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, completeness, reliability and readability of the responses generated by ChatGPT-3.5, -4o and Google Gemini to TMD-related inquiries. Forty-five questions covering various aspects of TMDs were created by two experts and submitted by one author to ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4 and Google Gemini on the same day. The responses were evaluated for accuracy, completeness and reliability using modified Likert scales. Readability was analysed with six validated indices via a specialised tool. Additional features, such as the inclusion of graphical elements, references and safeguard mechanisms, were also documented and analysed. The Pearson Chi-Square and One-Way ANOVA tests were used for data analysis. Google Gemini achieved the highest accuracy, providing 100% correct responses, followed by ChatGPT-3.5 (95.6%) and ChatGPT-4o (93.3%). ChatGPT-4o provided the most complete responses (91.1%), followed by ChatGPT-03 (64.4%) and Google Gemini (42.2%). The majority of responses were reliable, with ChatGPT-4o at 93.3% 'Absolutely Reliable', compared to 46.7% for ChatGPT-3.5 and 48.9% for Google Gemini. Both ChatGPT-4o and Google Gemini included references in responses, 22.2% and 13.3%, respectively, while ChatGPT-3.5 included none. Google Gemini was the only model that included multimedia (6.7%). Readability scores were highest for ChatGPT-3.5, suggesting its responses were more complex than those of Google Gemini and ChatGPT-4o. Both ChatGPT-4o and Google Gemini demonstrated accuracy and reliability in addressing TMD-related questions, with their responses being clear, easy to understand and complemented by safeguard statements encouraging specialist consultation. However, both platforms lacked evidence-based references. Only Google Gemini incorporated multimedia elements into its answers.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.231 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.084 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.444 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.423 Zit.