Scientific Creativity of Artificial Intelligence: Evaluation of Novel Research Ideas in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to contribute to scientific research as well as to many other fields. Although the contribution of AI in presenting and analyzing data has been widely studied, its potential to generate research ideas, especially in specialized fields such as oral and maxillofacial surgery, has not been widely studied. This study aims to evaluate the ability of ScholarGPT, an AI model specially trained for academic purposes, to suggest original and unpublished research ideas in six different fields of oral and maxillofacial surgery.
Materials and Methods: ScholarGPT was asked to generate five research ideas for each of the following six areas: impacted third molar surgery, dental implant surgery, bone augmentation techniques, orthognathic surgery, distraction osteogenesis, and zygomatic implant surgery. The novelty of these ideas was assessed through a literature search of PubMed.
Results: Among the AI-generated research ideas, 53.3% were identified as original. The novelty rate varied by topic, with the highest originality observed in orthognathic surgery and distraction osteogenesis (80%), while the lowest was found in impacted third molar surgery (20%). Statistical analysis revealed no significant correlation between research topics and originality (p = 0.44).
Conclusion: ScholarGPT can help generate new research ideas in oral and maxillofacial surgery using existing knowledge, but human evaluation is needed to determine whether these proposals are truly original and applicable.
Ethical Statement
Since the study does not involve any human participants, animal experiments, or the use of personal data, obtaining ethical approval was not required.
References
- 1. Mehraeen E, Attarian N, Tabari A, SeyedAlinaghi S. Transforming plastic surgery: an innovative role of Chat GPT in plastic surgery practices. Updates Surg. 2025;1-8.
- 2. Songkram N, Chootongchai S, Keereerat C, Songkram N. Potential of ChatGPT in academic research: exploring innovative thinking skills. Interact Learn Environ. 2024;1-23.
- 3. Levkovich I, Elyoseph Z. Suicide risk assessments through the eyes of ChatGPT-3.5 versus ChatGPT-4: vignette study. JMIR Ment Health. 2023;10:e51232.
- 4. Vu NGH, Wang K, Wang GG. Effective prompting with ChatGPT for problem formulation in engineering optimization. Eng Optim. 2025;1-18.
- 5. Krook J, Schneiders E, Seabrooke T, Leesakul N, Clos J. Large language models (LLMs) for legal advice: a scoping review. SSRN Electronic Journal. Published online 2024. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4976189
- 6. Meyer A, Riese J, Streichert T. Comparison of the performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 with that of medical students on the written German medical licensing examination: observational study. JMIR Med Educ. 2024;10:e50965.
- 7. Teebagy S, Colwell L, Wood E, Yaghy A, Faustina M. Improved performance of ChatGPT-4 on the OKAP examination: a comparative study with ChatGPT-3.5. J Acad Ophthalmol. 2023;15:e184-e187.
- 8. Balel Y. ScholarGPT’s performance in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2025;126:102114.
- 9. Balel Y. Can ChatGPT be used in oral and maxillofacial surgery? J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023;124:101471.
- 10. Karobari MI, Suryawanshi H, Patil SR. Revolutionizing oral and maxillofacial surgery: ChatGPT’s impact on decision support, patient communication, and continuing education. Int J Surg. 2024;110:3143-3145.
- 11. Balel Y, Zogo A, Yıldız S, Tanyeri H. Can ChatGPT-4o provide new systematic review ideas to oral and maxillofacial surgeons? J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024;125(5S2):101979.
- 12. Najafali D, Galbraith LG, Camacho JM, Arnold SH, Alperovich M, King TW, et al. Addressing the rhino in the room: ChatGPT creates “novel” patent ideas for rhinoplasty. Eplasty. 2024;24:e13.
- 13. Agarwal N, Grottke M, Mishra S, Brem A. A systematic literature review of constraint-based innovations: State of the art and future perspectives. IEEE Trans Eng Manag. 2016;64:3-15.
- 14. Bracio K, Szarucki M. Mixed methods utilisation in innovation management research: A systematic literature review and meta-summary. J Risk Financ Manag. 2020;13:252.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Surgery (Other) |
| Journal Section | Research Articles |
| Authors | |
| Early Pub Date | August 26, 2025 |
| Publication Date | August 29, 2025 |
| Submission Date | April 29, 2025 |
| Acceptance Date | July 21, 2025 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2025 Volume: 5 Issue: 2 |
