Exploring the potential of artificial intelligence chatbots in prosthodontics education.

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH BMC Medical Education Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1186/s12909-025-06849-w
Ravza Eraslan, Mustafa Ayata, Filiz Yagci, Haydar Albayrak
{"title":"Exploring the potential of artificial intelligence chatbots in prosthodontics education.","authors":"Ravza Eraslan, Mustafa Ayata, Filiz Yagci, Haydar Albayrak","doi":"10.1186/s12909-025-06849-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of widely used artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots in answering prosthodontics questions from the Dentistry Specialization Residency Examination (DSRE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 126 DSRE prosthodontics questions were divided into seven subtopics (dental morphology, materials science, fixed dentures, removable partial dentures, complete dentures, occlusion/temporomandibular joint, and dental implantology). Questions were translated into English by the authors, and this version of the questions were asked to five chatbots (ChatGPT-3.5, Gemini Advanced, Claude Pro, Microsoft Copilot, and Perplexity) within a 7-day period. Statistical analyses, including chi-square and z-tests, were performed to compare accuracy rates across the chatbots and subtopics at a significance level of 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall accuracy rates for the chatbots were as follows: Copilot (73%), Gemini (63.5%), ChatGPT-3.5 (61.1%), Claude Pro (57.9%), and Perplexity (54.8%). Copilot significantly outperformed Perplexity (P = 0.035). However, no significant differences in accuracy were found across subtopics among chatbots. Questions on dental implantology had the highest accuracy rate (75%), while questions on removable partial dentures had the lowest (50.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Copilot showed the highest accuracy rate (73%), significantly outperforming Perplexity (54.8%). AI models demonstrate potential as educational support tools but currently face limitations in serving as reliable educational tools across all areas of prosthodontics. Future advancements in AI may lead to better integration and more effective use in dental education.</p>","PeriodicalId":51234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Education","volume":"25 1","pages":"321"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11869545/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-06849-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of widely used artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots in answering prosthodontics questions from the Dentistry Specialization Residency Examination (DSRE).

Methods: A total of 126 DSRE prosthodontics questions were divided into seven subtopics (dental morphology, materials science, fixed dentures, removable partial dentures, complete dentures, occlusion/temporomandibular joint, and dental implantology). Questions were translated into English by the authors, and this version of the questions were asked to five chatbots (ChatGPT-3.5, Gemini Advanced, Claude Pro, Microsoft Copilot, and Perplexity) within a 7-day period. Statistical analyses, including chi-square and z-tests, were performed to compare accuracy rates across the chatbots and subtopics at a significance level of 0.05.

Results: The overall accuracy rates for the chatbots were as follows: Copilot (73%), Gemini (63.5%), ChatGPT-3.5 (61.1%), Claude Pro (57.9%), and Perplexity (54.8%). Copilot significantly outperformed Perplexity (P = 0.035). However, no significant differences in accuracy were found across subtopics among chatbots. Questions on dental implantology had the highest accuracy rate (75%), while questions on removable partial dentures had the lowest (50.8%).

Conclusion: Copilot showed the highest accuracy rate (73%), significantly outperforming Perplexity (54.8%). AI models demonstrate potential as educational support tools but currently face limitations in serving as reliable educational tools across all areas of prosthodontics. Future advancements in AI may lead to better integration and more effective use in dental education.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Education
BMC Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
795
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Education is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the training of healthcare professionals, including undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education. The journal has a special focus on curriculum development, evaluations of performance, assessment of training needs and evidence-based medicine.
期刊最新文献
Adaptation and assessment of the psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the nursing student competence scale. Advancing pre-clinical surgical education by using intuitive short videos. Effects of self-controlled feedback on learning range of motion measurement techniques and self-efficacy among physical therapy students: a preliminary study. Implementing the flipped classroom model to enhance knowledge retention in pharmacology: a local case study at Semmelweis university. Video education in open trauma: a program for developing trauma surgical skills.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1