Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Large Language model (LLM) in temporomandibular disorder education: a comparative study
0
Zitationen
3
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
With the increasing reliance on artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare information delivery, it is essential to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated responses. This study aimed to assess the quality of responses provided by three AI-based language models—ChatGPT-4, Gemini, and Copilot—on temporomandibular disorders (TMD), a complex and prevalent group of musculoskeletal conditions. A total of 83 questions, categorized into seven key domains of TMD (Anatomy, Signs and Symptoms, Etiology, Evaluation and Diagnosis, Treatment Options, Complications, and Prognosis), were presented independently to each AI model. Each response was evaluated and classified into one of five accuracy levels: False, Nonfactual, Minimal Facts, Selected Facts, and Objectively True. Statistical analysis, including Pearson Chi-Square and Fisher’s Exact tests, was conducted to determine the relationship between AI model and response accuracy. ChatGPT-4 produced the highest proportion of Objectively True answers (78.3%), significantly outperforming Gemini (53%) and Copilot (20.5%) (p < 0.05). Gemini’s responses predominantly consisted of Selected Facts, while Copilot’s outputs were largely incomplete or minimally informative. Statistically significant differences in response accuracy were observed across all thematic domains (p < 0.05). ChatGPT-4 demonstrated superior reliability in delivering accurate and comprehensive information about TMD, though inconsistencies remain in specific areas such as joint anatomy and prognosis. AI models should undergo rigorous validation before being employed in clinical or patient education settings.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) for Clinical and Research Applications: Recommendations of the International RDC/TMD Consortium Network* and Orofacial Pain Special Interest Group†
2014 · 4.239 Zit.
Research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders: review, criteria, examinations and specifications, critique.
1992 · 3.829 Zit.
The six keys to normal occlusion
1972 · 1.333 Zit.
International consensus on the assessment of bruxism: Report of a work in progress
2018 · 1.268 Zit.
Bruxism defined and graded: an international consensus
2012 · 1.268 Zit.