Comparing dentist and chatbot answers to dental questions for quality and empathy

Erin E. Maruska DMD, MPH , Amira Elgreatly BDS, MS , William Madaio DMD , Klud Razoky BDS, NZDREX , Curt Bay PhD , Ahmed Mahrous BDS, MS
{"title":"Comparing dentist and chatbot answers to dental questions for quality and empathy","authors":"Erin E. Maruska DMD, MPH ,&nbsp;Amira Elgreatly BDS, MS ,&nbsp;William Madaio DMD ,&nbsp;Klud Razoky BDS, NZDREX ,&nbsp;Curt Bay PhD ,&nbsp;Ahmed Mahrous BDS, MS","doi":"10.1016/j.jfscie.2025.100044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Integration of large language models (LLMs) into health care, particularly in patient communication, is a growing trend. This study evaluated the effectiveness of LLM chatbots in addressing dental patient queries compared with responses from human dentists on a public online forum.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In January 2024, 20 patient questions and responses were randomly sampled from Reddit’s dental advice community. We assessed the quality and empathy of ChatGPT-generated responses (Version GPT-3.5, OpenAI) by 9 blinded dentists. The dentists were selected from a dental faculty pool familiar with reading and assessing written communication. The evaluators rated the information quality of the responses on a Likert scale (very poor, 1; poor, 2; acceptable, 3; good, 4; very good, 5) and empathy (not empathetic, 1; slightly empathetic, 2; moderately empathetic, 3; empathetic, 4; very empathetic, 5). Subsequently, they selected the best response (dentist or artificial intelligence). Nine blinded dentists rated 20 responses to the online inquiries, providing 180 potential responses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The results indicated that the LLM chatbots’ responses were rated as higher quality and exhibited higher levels of empathy than human responses. Among 179 responses (1 was missing) to the question about whether the response was better from ChatGPT or the dentist, 167 (93.3%) responses indicated ChatGPT and 12 (6.7%) indicated dentist (<em>P</em> &lt; .001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Although subjective variations in assessing quality and empathy may exist, this study suggests that LLM chatbot responses show higher quality and empathy than online dentist responses. The use of LLM chatbots by dentists can enhance patient communication in dental practice owing to their efficiency, empathy, and quality. Further research is needed to determine the full potential of artificial intelligence in dentistry.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73530,"journal":{"name":"JADA foundational science","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 100044"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JADA foundational science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772414X25000015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Integration of large language models (LLMs) into health care, particularly in patient communication, is a growing trend. This study evaluated the effectiveness of LLM chatbots in addressing dental patient queries compared with responses from human dentists on a public online forum.

Methods

In January 2024, 20 patient questions and responses were randomly sampled from Reddit’s dental advice community. We assessed the quality and empathy of ChatGPT-generated responses (Version GPT-3.5, OpenAI) by 9 blinded dentists. The dentists were selected from a dental faculty pool familiar with reading and assessing written communication. The evaluators rated the information quality of the responses on a Likert scale (very poor, 1; poor, 2; acceptable, 3; good, 4; very good, 5) and empathy (not empathetic, 1; slightly empathetic, 2; moderately empathetic, 3; empathetic, 4; very empathetic, 5). Subsequently, they selected the best response (dentist or artificial intelligence). Nine blinded dentists rated 20 responses to the online inquiries, providing 180 potential responses.

Results

The results indicated that the LLM chatbots’ responses were rated as higher quality and exhibited higher levels of empathy than human responses. Among 179 responses (1 was missing) to the question about whether the response was better from ChatGPT or the dentist, 167 (93.3%) responses indicated ChatGPT and 12 (6.7%) indicated dentist (P < .001).

Conclusions

Although subjective variations in assessing quality and empathy may exist, this study suggests that LLM chatbot responses show higher quality and empathy than online dentist responses. The use of LLM chatbots by dentists can enhance patient communication in dental practice owing to their efficiency, empathy, and quality. Further research is needed to determine the full potential of artificial intelligence in dentistry.

Abstract Image

比较牙医和聊天机器人回答牙科问题的质量和同理心
将大型语言模型(llm)集成到医疗保健中,特别是在患者沟通中,是一个日益增长的趋势。这项研究评估了LLM聊天机器人在解决牙科患者问题方面的有效性,并将其与人类牙医在公共在线论坛上的回答进行了比较。方法于2024年1月,从Reddit牙科咨询社区随机抽取20例患者的问题和回答。我们评估了9位盲法牙医chatgpt生成的回答(版本GPT-3.5, OpenAI)的质量和同理心。这些牙医是从熟悉阅读和评估书面交流的牙科教师中挑选出来的。评估者用李克特量表(Likert scale)对回答的信息质量进行评分(非常差,1分;穷,2;可以接受的,3;好的,4;非常好,5分)和同理心(不同理心,1分;稍微有同理心,2分;适度同理心,3分;善解人意,4;随后,他们选择了最佳回应(牙医或人工智能)。9名不知情的牙医对20个在线问题的回答进行了评分,提供了180个可能的回答。结果结果表明,LLM聊天机器人的回答质量更高,表现出比人类更高的同理心水平。在179个回复中(1个缺失),167个(93.3%)回复ChatGPT, 12个(6.7%)回复牙医(P <;措施)。结论虽然评价质量和共情可能存在主观差异,但本研究表明LLM聊天机器人的反应比在线牙医的反应表现出更高的质量和共情。牙医使用LLM聊天机器人可以提高牙科实践中的患者沟通,因为它们的效率、同理心和质量。需要进一步的研究来确定人工智能在牙科中的全部潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JADA foundational science
JADA foundational science Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
103 days
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信