Skip to content
Open access

Evaluation of LLMs for Automated Dental-to-Medical Consult Letter Generation: Comparative Study

Sep 2026 · International Dental Journal · Vol 76 · 0 citations · 26 references
Medicine

TL;DR

This preliminary study suggests the potential of Gemini-2.5-Pro for automated consult letter generation, though the low test-set inter-rater reliability highlights the subjective complexity of clinical text.

Abstract

Introduction and aims For dental patients with systemic diseases, multidisciplinary care via referral letters is essential for clinical safety. This study evaluated the clinical feasibility and quality of dental-to-medical referral letters generated by Large Language Models (LLMs). Methods Using 153 paired datasets, three LLMs – Gemini-2.5-Pro, GPT-5 and MedGemma – generated referral letters via a standardised prompting framework. Two dental clinicians performed a blinded assessment across nine sub-criteria covering content, style and correctness. GPT-5 also performed an automated evaluation. Statistical significance was analysed using Friedman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with Holm correction. Results In the human clinical evaluation, Gemini-2.5-Pro achieved the highest overall performance (TOTAL mean SCORE: 2.9487 with a bootstrap 95% confidence interval [CI] of 2.9345-2.9606), significantly outperforming GPT-5 (2.8818 with 95% CI of 2.8613-2.9008) and MedGemma (2.8613 with 95% CI of 2.8338-2.8865) (P < .05). While GPT-5 showed high clarity in systemic problem descriptions, MedGemma excelled in structural adherence. The overall performance difference between GPT-5 and MedGemma was not statistically significant (P = .3519). Inter-rater reliability was strong in the prompt search dataset (QWK: 0.7175) but lower in the independent test dataset (QWK: 0.1505), reflecting the subjective nature of clinical document assessment; therefore, final human scores were reported as average ratings from two blinded clinicians with bootstrap confidence intervals. Notably, GPT-5’s self-evaluation results deviated from human judgment, exhibiting potential model-based bias. Conclusion This preliminary study suggests the potential of Gemini-2.5-Pro for automated consult letter generation, though the low test-set inter-rater reliability (QWK: 0.1505) highlights the subjective complexity of clinical text. To integrate these assistive prototypes into routine clinical application, more systematic studies are required. Clinical relevance Integrating LLMs offers a promising approach to assisting with dental-to-medical referrals, presenting a potential future benefit of reducing administrative workloads and enabling healthcare providers to focus on safe, empathetic patient care.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access Sep 2026

Diagnostic accuracy of multimodal large language models compared with oral medicine specialists: a benchmarking study in salivary gland diseases

This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of multimodal Large Language Models (LLMS), namely, ChatGPT-5, ChatGPT-4o, and Gemini Pro 2.5, with board-certified oral medicine specialists. In this retrospective diagnostic accuracy study, 300 histopathologically confirmed salivary gland disease cases served as the...

Fatma E. A. Hassanein, Yousra Ahmed, Asmaa Abou-Bakr et al. · 0 citations
Aug 2026

Evaluation of Large Language Model-Generated Recommendations in Glaucoma Surgical Decision-Making.

LLM-based chatbots can provide acceptable surgical guidance for straightforward primary surgical cases, but their utility is limited in high-risk or complex clinical settings, and their rationale quality was significantly lower in complex scenarios than in primary ones.

Müge Toprak, Büşra Yılmaz Tuğan, N. Yüksel · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

Development and Clinical Validation of an Automated LLM Judge for Evaluating Perioperative Patient Questions

Background: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in patient-facing clinical applications, creating a need for scalable methods to evaluate the accuracy, safety, and appropriateness of their responses. Although physician review remains the reference standard, it is resource-intensive and difficult to scale...

B. Collaço, Nadia G. Wood, Yun-Guo Yu 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
#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

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