A Review of ChatGPT as a Reliable Source of Scientific Information Regarding Endodontic Local Anesthesia.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Al Reader, Melissa Drum
{"title":"A Review of ChatGPT as a Reliable Source of Scientific Information Regarding Endodontic Local Anesthesia.","authors":"Al Reader, Melissa Drum","doi":"10.1016/j.joen.2025.02.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence chatbot, developed by OpenAI, which uses Deep Learning technology for information processing. The chatbot uses natural language processing and machine learning algorithms to respond to users' questions. The purpose of this study was to review ChatGPT responses to determine if they were a reliable source of scientific information regarding local anesthesia for endodontics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixteen representative questions pertaining to local anesthesia for endodontics were selected. ChatGPT was asked to answer the 16 questions and provide supporting references. Each provided ChatGPT reference was evaluated for accuracy using NLM NIH.GOV (PubMed), Google Scholar, journal citations, and author citations. Peer-reviewed, evidence-based literature citations related to the initial questions were collected by the authors. The 2 authors independently compared the answers of the ChatGPT to the peer-reviewed, evidence-based literature using a 5-answer Likert-type scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ChatGPT was reliable 50% of the time when compared to the peer-reviewed, evidence-based literature. That is, ChatGPT had the same literature-based response as our peer-reviewed, evidence-based literature in 16 of the 32 questions. Of the 51 total references for Chatbot, 59% (30 of 51) had the wrong reference, 12% (6 of 51) of the references couldn't be retrieved and 18% (9 of 51) of the references were hallucinations (made up references).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Artificial intelligence needs further training to be trusted for accurate information in the field of endodontic anesthesia. ChatGPT should continue to improve to provide reliable information for providers and patients alike.</p>","PeriodicalId":15703,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endodontics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2025.02.002","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence chatbot, developed by OpenAI, which uses Deep Learning technology for information processing. The chatbot uses natural language processing and machine learning algorithms to respond to users' questions. The purpose of this study was to review ChatGPT responses to determine if they were a reliable source of scientific information regarding local anesthesia for endodontics.

Methods: Sixteen representative questions pertaining to local anesthesia for endodontics were selected. ChatGPT was asked to answer the 16 questions and provide supporting references. Each provided ChatGPT reference was evaluated for accuracy using NLM NIH.GOV (PubMed), Google Scholar, journal citations, and author citations. Peer-reviewed, evidence-based literature citations related to the initial questions were collected by the authors. The 2 authors independently compared the answers of the ChatGPT to the peer-reviewed, evidence-based literature using a 5-answer Likert-type scale.

Results: ChatGPT was reliable 50% of the time when compared to the peer-reviewed, evidence-based literature. That is, ChatGPT had the same literature-based response as our peer-reviewed, evidence-based literature in 16 of the 32 questions. Of the 51 total references for Chatbot, 59% (30 of 51) had the wrong reference, 12% (6 of 51) of the references couldn't be retrieved and 18% (9 of 51) of the references were hallucinations (made up references).

Conclusions: Artificial intelligence needs further training to be trusted for accurate information in the field of endodontic anesthesia. ChatGPT should continue to improve to provide reliable information for providers and patients alike.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of endodontics
Journal of endodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
224
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endodontics, the official journal of the American Association of Endodontists, publishes scientific articles, case reports and comparison studies evaluating materials and methods of pulp conservation and endodontic treatment. Endodontists and general dentists can learn about new concepts in root canal treatment and the latest advances in techniques and instrumentation in the one journal that helps them keep pace with rapid changes in this field.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信