评估 ChatGPT 3.5 和 ChatGPT 4 在牙科手术和根管治疗中的性能:一项探索性研究

IF 4.3 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies Pub Date : 2024-10-08 DOI:10.1155/2024/1119816
Niher Tabassum Snigdha, Rumesa Batul, Mohmed Isaqali Karobari, Abdul Habeeb Adil, Ali Azhar Dawasaz, Mohammad Shahul Hameed, Vini Mehta, Tahir Yusuf Noorani
{"title":"评估 ChatGPT 3.5 和 ChatGPT 4 在牙科手术和根管治疗中的性能:一项探索性研究","authors":"Niher Tabassum Snigdha,&nbsp;Rumesa Batul,&nbsp;Mohmed Isaqali Karobari,&nbsp;Abdul Habeeb Adil,&nbsp;Ali Azhar Dawasaz,&nbsp;Mohammad Shahul Hameed,&nbsp;Vini Mehta,&nbsp;Tahir Yusuf Noorani","doi":"10.1155/2024/1119816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>Background</b>: Artificial intelligence is an innovative technology that mimics human cognitive capacities and has gathered the world’s attention through its vast applications in various fields.</p><p><b>Aim:</b> This study is aimed at assessing the effects of ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 on the validity, reliability, and authenticity of standard assessment techniques used in undergraduate dentistry education.</p><p><b>Methodology:</b> Twenty questions, each requiring a single best answer, were selected from two domains: 10 from operative dentistry and 10 from endodontics. These questions were divided equally, with half presented with multiple choice options and the other half without. Two investigators used different ChatGPT accounts to generate answers, repeating each question three times. The answers were scored between 0% and 100% based on their accuracy. The mean score of the three attempts was recorded, and statistical analysis was conducted.</p><p><b>Results</b>: No statistically significant differences were found between ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 in the accuracy of their responses. Additionally, the analysis showed high consistency between the two reviewers, with no significant difference in their assessments.</p><p><b>Conclusion:</b> This study evaluated the performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 in answering questions related to endodontics and operative dentistry. The results showed no statistically significant differences between the two versions, indicating comparable response accuracy. The consistency between reviewers further validated the reliability of the assessment process.</p>","PeriodicalId":36408,"journal":{"name":"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/1119816","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the Performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 in Operative Dentistry and Endodontics: An Exploratory Study\",\"authors\":\"Niher Tabassum Snigdha,&nbsp;Rumesa Batul,&nbsp;Mohmed Isaqali Karobari,&nbsp;Abdul Habeeb Adil,&nbsp;Ali Azhar Dawasaz,&nbsp;Mohammad Shahul Hameed,&nbsp;Vini Mehta,&nbsp;Tahir Yusuf Noorani\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2024/1119816\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><b>Background</b>: Artificial intelligence is an innovative technology that mimics human cognitive capacities and has gathered the world’s attention through its vast applications in various fields.</p><p><b>Aim:</b> This study is aimed at assessing the effects of ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 on the validity, reliability, and authenticity of standard assessment techniques used in undergraduate dentistry education.</p><p><b>Methodology:</b> Twenty questions, each requiring a single best answer, were selected from two domains: 10 from operative dentistry and 10 from endodontics. These questions were divided equally, with half presented with multiple choice options and the other half without. Two investigators used different ChatGPT accounts to generate answers, repeating each question three times. The answers were scored between 0% and 100% based on their accuracy. The mean score of the three attempts was recorded, and statistical analysis was conducted.</p><p><b>Results</b>: No statistically significant differences were found between ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 in the accuracy of their responses. Additionally, the analysis showed high consistency between the two reviewers, with no significant difference in their assessments.</p><p><b>Conclusion:</b> This study evaluated the performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 in answering questions related to endodontics and operative dentistry. The results showed no statistically significant differences between the two versions, indicating comparable response accuracy. The consistency between reviewers further validated the reliability of the assessment process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36408,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/1119816\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/1119816\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/1119816","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目的:本研究旨在评估 ChatGPT 3.5 和 ChatGPT 4 对本科口腔医学教育中使用的标准评估技术的有效性、可靠性和真实性的影响:从两个领域中选择了 20 个问题,每个问题都有一个最佳答案:其中 10 个问题来自牙科手术,10 个问题来自牙髓病学。这些问题被平均分配,一半有多项选择题,另一半没有。两名调查人员使用不同的 ChatGPT 账户生成答案,每个问题重复三次。根据答案的准确性在 0% 和 100% 之间打分。记录三次尝试的平均得分,并进行统计分析:结果:ChatGPT 3.5 和 ChatGPT 4 在回答的准确性方面没有发现明显的统计学差异。此外,分析表明两位审稿人之间的一致性很高,他们的评估结果没有明显差异:本研究评估了 ChatGPT 3.5 和 ChatGPT 4 在回答牙髓病学和牙科手术相关问题时的表现。结果表明,两个版本在统计学上没有明显差异,这表明回答的准确性相当。审阅者之间的一致性进一步验证了评估过程的可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Assessing the Performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 in Operative Dentistry and Endodontics: An Exploratory Study

Background: Artificial intelligence is an innovative technology that mimics human cognitive capacities and has gathered the world’s attention through its vast applications in various fields.

Aim: This study is aimed at assessing the effects of ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 on the validity, reliability, and authenticity of standard assessment techniques used in undergraduate dentistry education.

Methodology: Twenty questions, each requiring a single best answer, were selected from two domains: 10 from operative dentistry and 10 from endodontics. These questions were divided equally, with half presented with multiple choice options and the other half without. Two investigators used different ChatGPT accounts to generate answers, repeating each question three times. The answers were scored between 0% and 100% based on their accuracy. The mean score of the three attempts was recorded, and statistical analysis was conducted.

Results: No statistically significant differences were found between ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 in the accuracy of their responses. Additionally, the analysis showed high consistency between the two reviewers, with no significant difference in their assessments.

Conclusion: This study evaluated the performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 in answering questions related to endodontics and operative dentistry. The results showed no statistically significant differences between the two versions, indicating comparable response accuracy. The consistency between reviewers further validated the reliability of the assessment process.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies
Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
17.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to publishing high-impact research that enhances understanding of the complex interactions between diverse human behavior and emerging digital technologies.
期刊最新文献
Customizability in Conversational Agents and Their Impact on Health Engagement (Stage 2) Crafting Robust Brands for Premium Pricing: Understanding the Synergy of Brand Strength, Loyalty, and Attachment Leveraging Big Data Analytics for Understanding Consumer Behavior in Digital Marketing: A Systematic Review The Use of Physical Activity Mobile Apps Improves the Psychological State of Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial Digital Life Balance and Need for Online Social Feedback: Cross–Cultural Psychometric Analysis in Brazil
×
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