ChatGPT in dentomaxillofacial radiology education

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 224 - 229, 25.03.2024

Hilal Peker Öztürk , Hakan Avsever , Buğra Şenel , Şükran Ayran , Mustafa Çağrı Peker , Hatice Seda Özgedik , Nurten Baysal

https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1419341

Öz

Aims: Artificial intelligence refers to the ability of computer systems or machines to perform cognitive functions and tasks that are similar to humans’. The aim of this study is to assess the knowledge and interpretative abilities of ChatGPT-versions by administering a dentomaxillofacial-radiology exam, comparing its performance with that of dentistry-students in Türkiye, and questioning the effectiveness of different languages.
Methods: It is a descriptive research comparing the data of ChatGPT versions 3.5 and 4 in both Turkish and English.
Results: Firstly 20 test-questions were evaluated. There is a significant difference(p<0.05) between the ChatGPT answer-sheets. ChatGPT-4 in English demonstrated the highest performance. Answer-sheets of chatGPT-4 in Turkish and English demonstrated the best performance with 5 correct answers in open-ended-questions. Based on the answers of 89 students to 20 test-questions, a class-profile was created. ChatGPT answer-sheets and class-profile were analyzed(p<0.05). Class-profile ranked first as ChatGPT-4 in English. A significant difference was found between the answer-sheets of ChatGPT and the class-
profile for open-ended-questions(p<0.10). The most successful results were obtained from ChatGPT-4 in Turkish and English, as well as the class-profile.
Conclusion: It is important to mention that ChatGPT 3.5’s knowledge and perception in the field of dentomaxillofacial radiology are not sufficient, particularly for use in examinations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

artificial intelligence, dentistry, education, oral radiology

Kaynakça

• 1. Huh S. Are ChatGPT’s knowledge and interpretation ability comparable to those of medical students in Korea for taking a parasitology examination?: a descriptive study. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:1.
• 2. Keser G, Pekiner FN. Attitudes, perceptions and knowledge regarding the future of artificial intelligence in oral radiology among a group of dental students in Turkey: a survey. Clin Exp Health Sci. 2021;11(4):637-641.
• 3. Yüzbaşıoğlu E. Attitudes and perceptions of dental students towards artificial intelligence. J Dent Educ. 2021;85(1):60-68.
• 4. Sur J, Bose S, Khan F, Dewangan D, Sawriya E, Roul A. Knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding the future of artificial intelligence in oral radiology in India: a survey. Imaging Sci Dent. 2020;50(3):193-198.
• 5. Thurzo A, Strunga M, Urban R, Surovková J, Afrashtehfar KI. Impact of artificial intelligence on dental education: a review and guide for curriculum update. Educ Sci. 2023;13(2):150.
• 6. Gilson A, Safranek CW, Huang T, et al. How does ChatGPT perform on the united states medical licensing examination? The implications of large language models for medical education and knowledge assessment. JMIR Med Educ. 2023;9(1):e45312.
• 7. Cascella M, Montomoli J, Bellini V, Bignami E. Evaluating the feasibility of chatgpt in healthcare: an analysis of multiple clinical and research scenarios. J Med Syst. 2023;47(1):33.
• 8. Ollivier M, Pareek A, Dahmen J, et al. A deeper dive into ChatGPT: history, use and future perspectives for orthopaedic research. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023;31(4):1190-1192.
• 9. Ding H, Wu J, Zhao W, Matinlinna JP, Burrow MF, Tsoi JK. Artificial intelligence in dentistry-a review. Front Dent Med. 2023;4:1085251. doi: 10.3389/fdmed.2023.1085251
• 10. Agrawal P, Nikhade P. Artificial intelligence in dentistry: past, present, and future. Cureus. 2022;14(7):e27405.
• 11. Nguyen TT, Larrivee N, Lee A, Bilaniuk O, Durand R. Use of artificial intelligence in dentistry: current clinical trends and research advances. J Can Dent Assoc. 2021;87(l7):1488-2159.
• 12. Park SH, Do KH, Kim S, Park JH, Lim YS. What should medical students know about artificial intelligence in medicine? J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2019;16:18.
• 13. Eysenbach G. The role of ChatGPT, generative language models, and artificial intelligence in medical education: a conversation with ChatGPT and a call for papers. JMIR Med Educ. 2023;9(1):e46885. doi: 10.2196/46885
• 14. Fatani B. ChatGPT for future medical and dental research. Cureus. 2023;15(4):e37285. doi: 10.7759/cureus.37285
• 15. Khurana S, Vaddi A. ChatGPT from the perspective of an academic oral and maxillofacial radiologist. Cureus. 2023;15(6):e40053. doi: 10.7759/cureus.40053
• 16. Alkaissi H, McFarlane SI. Artificial hallucinations in ChatGPT: Implications in scientific writing. Cureus. 2023;15(2):e35179. doi: 10.7759/cureus.35179
• 17. Ali SR, Dobbs TD, Hutchings HA, Whitaker IS. Using ChatGPT to write patient clinic letters. Lancet Digit Health. 2023;5(4):e179-e181. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00048-1
• 18. Salvagno M, Taccone FS, Gerli AG. Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? Crit Care. 2023;27(1):75. doi: 10.1186/s13054-023-04380-2