Effectiveness of AI-generated orthodontic treatment plans compared to expert orthodontist recommendations: a cross-sectional pilot study.

Q2 Medicine
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics Pub Date : 2025-03-24 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1590/2177-6709.30.1.e2524186.oar
Orlando Motohiro Tanaka, Gil Guilherme Gasparello, Sergio Luiz Mota-Júnior, Mohamad Jamal Bark, Jacqueline de Almeida Antunes Rozyscki, Rafael Bordin Wolanski
{"title":"Effectiveness of AI-generated orthodontic treatment plans compared to expert orthodontist recommendations: a cross-sectional pilot study.","authors":"Orlando Motohiro Tanaka, Gil Guilherme Gasparello, Sergio Luiz Mota-Júnior, Mohamad Jamal Bark, Jacqueline de Almeida Antunes Rozyscki, Rafael Bordin Wolanski","doi":"10.1590/2177-6709.30.1.e2524186.oar","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) has become a prominent focus in orthodontics.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare treatment plans generated by AI platforms (ChatGPT, Google Bard, Microsoft Bing) with those formulated by an experienced orthodontist.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This observational cross-sectional pilot study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of AI-powered platforms in creating orthodontic treatment plans, using a clinical case treated by an experienced orthodontist as a benchmark. A clinical case was selected, and after obtaining informed consent, detailed case information was presented to ChatGPT-3.5, Microsoft Bing Copilot, and Google Bard Gemini for treatment planning. The AI-generated plans, along with the orthodontist's plan, were evaluated by 34 orthodontists using a questionnaire that included Likert scale and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) items. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the levels of agreement with the proposed treatment plans.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Orthodontists exhibited significantly higher levels of agreement with treatment plans proposed by the orthodontist, compared to those generated by AIs platforms (p < 0.001). Both Likert scale and VAS scores indicated increased confidence in the orthodontist's expertise in formulating treatment plans. No significant differences were found among the AI platforms, though Google Bard received the lowest mean scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Orthodontists demonstrated a higher level of acceptance of treatment plans formulated by human counterparts over those generated by AI platforms. While AI offers significant contributions, the clinical judgment and experience of orthodontists remain essential for thorough and effective treatment planning in orthodontics.</p>","PeriodicalId":38720,"journal":{"name":"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"30 1","pages":"e2524186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11939423/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.30.1.e2524186.oar","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) has become a prominent focus in orthodontics.

Objective: This study aimed to compare treatment plans generated by AI platforms (ChatGPT, Google Bard, Microsoft Bing) with those formulated by an experienced orthodontist.

Methods: This observational cross-sectional pilot study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of AI-powered platforms in creating orthodontic treatment plans, using a clinical case treated by an experienced orthodontist as a benchmark. A clinical case was selected, and after obtaining informed consent, detailed case information was presented to ChatGPT-3.5, Microsoft Bing Copilot, and Google Bard Gemini for treatment planning. The AI-generated plans, along with the orthodontist's plan, were evaluated by 34 orthodontists using a questionnaire that included Likert scale and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) items. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the levels of agreement with the proposed treatment plans.

Results: Orthodontists exhibited significantly higher levels of agreement with treatment plans proposed by the orthodontist, compared to those generated by AIs platforms (p < 0.001). Both Likert scale and VAS scores indicated increased confidence in the orthodontist's expertise in formulating treatment plans. No significant differences were found among the AI platforms, though Google Bard received the lowest mean scores.

Conclusions: Orthodontists demonstrated a higher level of acceptance of treatment plans formulated by human counterparts over those generated by AI platforms. While AI offers significant contributions, the clinical judgment and experience of orthodontists remain essential for thorough and effective treatment planning in orthodontics.

人工智能生成的正畸治疗计划与专家正畸医生建议的有效性比较:一项横断面试点研究。
人工智能(AI)已经成为口腔正畸学的一个突出焦点。目的:本研究旨在比较人工智能平台(ChatGPT、b谷歌Bard、Microsoft Bing)与经验丰富的正畸医生制定的治疗方案。方法:本观察性横断面试点研究旨在评估人工智能平台在制定正畸治疗计划方面的有效性,以一位经验丰富的正畸医生治疗的临床病例为基准。选择1例临床病例,在征得患者知情同意后,将详细的病例信息提交给ChatGPT-3.5、Microsoft Bing Copilot和b谷歌Bard Gemini进行治疗计划。34名正畸医生使用包括李克特量表和视觉模拟量表(VAS)项目在内的问卷对人工智能生成的计划和正畸医生的计划进行评估。进行统计分析,比较与建议治疗方案的一致程度。结果:与人工智能平台生成的治疗方案相比,正畸医生对正畸医生提出的治疗方案表现出明显更高的一致性(p < 0.001)。李克特量表和VAS评分都表明,正畸医生在制定治疗计划方面的专业知识增加了信心。人工智能平台之间没有发现显著差异,尽管b谷歌Bard的平均得分最低。结论:与人工智能平台生成的治疗方案相比,正畸医生对人类同行制定的治疗方案的接受程度更高。虽然人工智能提供了重要的贡献,但正畸医生的临床判断和经验对于全面有效的正畸治疗计划仍然至关重要。
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
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: The Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics publishes scientific research articles, significant reviews, clinical and technical case reports, brief communications, and other materials related to Orthodontics and Facial Orthopedics.
×
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