ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of artificial intelligence robot's knowledge and reliability on dental implants and peri-implant phenotype.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of artificial intelligence-based chatbots and expert periodontists in responding to patient questions: a multi-dimensional analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- How Reliably Do Large Language Models Reproduce Vital Pulp Therapy Guidelines? A Mixed-Effects Evaluation of Guideline-Concordance and Error Directionality.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Large language models in implant dentistry: a scoping review of applications, performance, and limitations.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Feasibility of a multi-metric framework for evaluating patient-facing AI communication in cosmetic dentistry: an exploratory proof-of-concept study.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Novel desktop robotic system for orthodontic archwire bending: an accuracy and efficiency comparison with manual bending.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Conversational Models in Providing Information on Dental Implants: A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT, Gemini and MedGebra.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Comparison of responses from different artificial intelligence-powered chatbots regarding the All-on-four dental implant concept.BMC oral health · 2025Article
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
The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and quality of information generated by ChatGPT regarding dental implants and peri-implant phenotypes. A structured questionnaire on these topics was presented to the AI-based chatbot, and its responses were assessed by dental professionals using a modified Global Quality Scale (GQS) and the DISCERN tool. The study included 60 participants divided into three professional groups: oral and maxillofacial surgeons, periodontologists, and general dental practitioners. While no statistically significant differences were observed among the groups (p > 0.05), oral and maxillofacial surgeons consistently assigned lower DISCERN and GQS scores compared to other professionals. The findings of this study suggest that ChatGPT has the potential to serve as a supplementary tool for patient information in dental implant procedures. However, its responses may lack the depth and specificity required for clinical decision-making. Dental professionals should exercise caution when relying on artificial intelligence (AI) -generated content and guide patients in interpreting such information. Future research should explore the variability of AI responses, assess multiple chatbot platforms, and investigate their integration into dental clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.