Skip to content
Review Open access

Assessing the accuracy and usability of artificial intelligence-based language models in responding to common periodontal patient questions.

Sep 2026 · Clinical Advances in Periodontics · 0 citations · 19 references
Medicine

TL;DR

LLMs show variable performance in answering frequent periodontal patients' questions, influenced by model architecture, language, question type, and evaluative domain, and significant limitations remain particularly in Persian language output and in usability for patients with limited scientific literacy.

Abstract

Background

Artificial intelligence-powered large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used by patients seeking quick information regarding dental and medical problems. Despite their growing popularity, concerns remain regarding the accuracy, clarity, and clinical usefulness of LLM-generated responses. This study aimed to comparatively evaluate the accuracy and usability of widely used LLMs in responding to frequently asked periodontal questions.

Methods

In this analytical-comparative study, 15 commonly asked periodontal questions were selected from real patient encounters and administered to ten LLMs in both English and Persian. Responses were evaluated independently and blindly by two board-certified periodontists; disagreements were resolved by discussion or third-reviewer. Each response was rated on a 5-point Likert scale across six criteria: correlation with the question, adequacy, comprehensiveness, clarity/readability, usability for individuals with limited scientific literacy, and scientific accuracy. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test with Bonferroni correction, and univariate ANOVA. Significance level was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Significant differences were observed among LLMS (χ2 = 294.78, p < 0.001). ChatGPT-4.5 with deep search enabled achieved the highest scores across most criteria, while ChatGPT-4o generally underperformed compared with other LLMs. English responses scored significantly higher than Persian (mean 4.25 vs. 3.96; U = 333,058, p < 0.001). Among evaluated criteria, correlation had the highest mean score (4.81), whereas usability for individuals with limited scientific literacy had the lowest score (3.80). LLMs performed significantly better on treatment/prevention questions than on diagnosis/pathogenesis questions. Only ChatGPT-4.5 (deep search) and Grok-3 (deep search) provided citations, with ChatGPT-4.5 referencing more specialized dental sources.

Conclusions

LLMs show variable performance in answering frequent periodontal patients' questions, influenced by model architecture, language, question type, and evaluative domain. Although advanced configurations such as deep-search ChatGPT-4.5 offer highly accurate, comprehensive, and well-referenced responses, significant limitations remain particularly in Persian language output and in usability for patients with limited scientific literacy. LLMs may serve as complementary tools for patient communication, but should not replace professional advice. Further development and language-specific optimization are needed to improve global accessibility and reliability. KEY POINTS While AI tools provide highly readable and generally accurate periodontal information, they often lack the clinical nuance required for personalized risk assessment and complex treatment planning. Practitioners should proactively discuss AI-generated health information with patients to address potential oversimplifications and ensure online advice is integrated into a professional, evidence-based care plan. As patients increasingly rely on AI for initial health guidance, practitioners must act as the authoritative "filter" to verify that online information remains clinically safe, accurate, and aligned with the patient's specific treatment goals. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY Many people now turn to artificial intelligence for help with their dental questions. This study found that these tools vary in how well they answer questions about gum disease. While the most advanced models (such as ChatGPT-4.5) provide accurate, high-quality information, there are two main limitations: first, performance is significantly better in English than in Persian; second, many explanations are too technical and hard for the average person to understand. Overall, while AI can be a helpful guide, it should never replace a professional consultation with a dentist.

Read PDF

Similar papers

#small language model Review Open access Sep 2026

Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models in Responding to Common Misconceptions Regarding Periodontal Disease and Oral Hygiene

emporary LLMs provide uniformly accurate and clinically safe responses to patient-focused periodontal misconceptions, with scores consistently concentrated at the ceiling, however, absolute readability metrics demonstrate that AI-generated outputs consistently exceed standard public health literacy comprehension levels...

İsmail Gül, Resül Çolak, Merve Küçükoğlu Çolak et al. · 0 citations
Aug 2026

Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models in Answering Patient Questions Following Periodontal and Peri-Implant Examination: An Expert-Based Study.

G Gemini demonstrated superior clinical precision and safety, whereas Claude provided more comprehensive and readable explanations, which support the integration of LLMs as pragmatic, high-ecological-validity complementary tools for patient education, while emphasizing the persistent necessity for professional clinical...

Ramazan Ağırağaç, Vedat Yüksekkaya · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Accuracy and response repeatability of three large language models on undergraduate operative dentistry multiple-choice questions

All three large language models demonstrated high accuracy on operative dentistry MCQs, suggesting their potential utility as a supplementary educational tool, however, the residual error rates in the answers warrant the cautious integration of LLMs into dental education.

J. M. Antony, Nikhil Harikrishnan, N. Jayasheelan · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models as Virtual Orthodontic Patient Information Assistants

It is demonstrated that LLMs can serve as auxiliary tools in providing orthodontic patient information but responses should be checked by an expert before being presented to patients and should be adapted into simpler and more understandable language.

Alperen Erdoğan, Orhan Çiçek · 0 citations
Sep 2026

Comparative evaluation of large language models in interpreting the scientific literature on intraoral scanners across varying input levels.

Evaluating the response accuracy of 2 advanced large language models found the Gemini-3.0 Flash responses excelled in highly structured, direct-response questions to relevance, clarity, and closeness to the article, whereas the ChatGPT-5.2 response demonstrated greater scientific accuracy at all levels and performed be...

Pranay Jain, F. R, A. V et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

When Artificial Intelligence Speaks For The Obstetrician: Multilingual Accuracy On Real Patient Questions

This study aimed to compare the response accuracy and reference quality of three free LLMs in Turkish and English using common pregnancy-related questions and found that Google Gemini and DeepSeek provided more accurate responses in English than in Turkish.

A. Tığlı, Y. Baykuş, R. Deniz et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.