Assessing the reliability of ChatGPT: a content analysis of self-generated and self-answered questions on clear aligners, TADs and digital imaging.

Q2 Medicine
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics Pub Date : 2023-11-03 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1590/2177-6709.28.5.e2323183.oar
Orlando Motohiro Tanaka, Gil Guilherme Gasparello, Giovani Ceron Hartmann, Fernando Augusto Casagrande, Matheus Melo Pithon
{"title":"Assessing the reliability of ChatGPT: a content analysis of self-generated and self-answered questions on clear aligners, TADs and digital imaging.","authors":"Orlando Motohiro Tanaka, Gil Guilherme Gasparello, Giovani Ceron Hartmann, Fernando Augusto Casagrande, Matheus Melo Pithon","doi":"10.1590/2177-6709.28.5.e2323183.oar","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a tool that is already part of our reality, and this is an opportunity to understand how it can be useful in interacting with patients and providing valuable information about orthodontics.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study evaluated the accuracy of ChatGPT in providing accurate and quality information to answer questions on Clear aligners, Temporary anchorage devices and Digital imaging in orthodontics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>forty-five questions and answers were generated by the ChatGPT 4.0, and analyzed separately by five orthodontists. The evaluators independently rated the quality of information provided on a Likert scale, in which higher scores indicated greater quality of information (1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = acceptable; 4 = good; 5 = very good). The Kruskal-Wallis H test (p< 0.05) and post-hoc pairwise comparisons with the Bonferroni correction were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From the 225 evaluations of the five different evaluators, 11 (4.9%) were considered as very poor, 4 (1.8%) as poor, and 15 (6.7%) as acceptable. The majority were considered as good [34 (15,1%)] and very good [161 (71.6%)]. Regarding evaluators' scores, a slight agreement was perceived, with Fleiss's Kappa equal to 0.004.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ChatGPT has proven effective in providing quality answers related to clear aligners, temporary anchorage devices, and digital imaging within the context of interest of orthodontics.</p>","PeriodicalId":38720,"journal":{"name":"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"28 5","pages":"e2323183"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10627416/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.28.5.e2323183.oar","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a tool that is already part of our reality, and this is an opportunity to understand how it can be useful in interacting with patients and providing valuable information about orthodontics.

Objective: This study evaluated the accuracy of ChatGPT in providing accurate and quality information to answer questions on Clear aligners, Temporary anchorage devices and Digital imaging in orthodontics.

Methods: forty-five questions and answers were generated by the ChatGPT 4.0, and analyzed separately by five orthodontists. The evaluators independently rated the quality of information provided on a Likert scale, in which higher scores indicated greater quality of information (1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = acceptable; 4 = good; 5 = very good). The Kruskal-Wallis H test (p< 0.05) and post-hoc pairwise comparisons with the Bonferroni correction were performed.

Results: From the 225 evaluations of the five different evaluators, 11 (4.9%) were considered as very poor, 4 (1.8%) as poor, and 15 (6.7%) as acceptable. The majority were considered as good [34 (15,1%)] and very good [161 (71.6%)]. Regarding evaluators' scores, a slight agreement was perceived, with Fleiss's Kappa equal to 0.004.

Conclusions: ChatGPT has proven effective in providing quality answers related to clear aligners, temporary anchorage devices, and digital imaging within the context of interest of orthodontics.

评估ChatGPT的可靠性:关于清晰对准器、TAD和数字成像的自我生成和自我回答问题的内容分析。
引言:人工智能(AI)是一种已经成为我们现实的工具,这是一个了解它如何在与患者互动和提供有关正畸的宝贵信息方面发挥作用的机会。目的:本研究评估了ChatGPT在提供准确和高质量的信息以回答有关正畸中的透明矫正器、临时锚固装置和数字成像的问题方面的准确性。方法:使用ChatGPT4.0生成45个问答,并由5名正畸医生分别进行分析。评估人员根据Likert量表对所提供信息的质量进行独立评分,其中得分越高表示信息质量越高(1=非常差;2=差;3=可接受;4=好;5=非常好)。进行Kruskal-Wallis H检验(p<0.05)和与Bonferroni校正的事后配对比较。结果:在五名不同评估者的225项评估中,11项(4.9%)被认为非常差,4项(1.8%)被认为差,15项(6.7%)被视为可接受。大多数被认为是好的[34(15,1%)]和非常好的[161(71.6%)]。关于评估者的得分,人们认为略有一致,Fleiss的Kappa等于0.004。
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