Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
August 16, 2025

Artificial intelligence in maxillofacial trauma: expert ally or unreliable assistant?

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

NAN AgbulutMÜMurat Ünlü

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Analysis assesses accuracy and reliability of AI in oral and maxillofacial trauma, highlighting its potential and limitations.

Key Points

  • ChatGPT-4o achieved 38% accuracy for comprehensive responses and 58% for adequate ones, showing potential as an educational tool.
  • Moderate reliability was indicated by a weighted kappa of 0.469 and ICC of 0.503, suggesting mixed effectiveness.
  • Internal consistency was rated excellent with Cronbach's alpha at 0.904, supporting AI's integration in clinical settings.
  • Future improvements in AI and prompt engineering may enhance clinical applicability and meet evidence-based standards.

Cite This Study

Agbulut et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68af2d7ccf1dd9ea359e58d0https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.27229
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Accuracy of ChatGPT‐4 Plus in Providing Information on Oral Cancer Management2025 · 2 citations
  2. 2The Performance of Artificial Intelligence in Providing Real‐Time Aid in Emergency Dental Trauma: A Clinical Validation Study2025 · 5 citations
  3. 3Evaluating ChatGPT's Diagnostic Accuracy in Oral Mucosal Lesions: A Comparative Study with a Maxillofacial Surgeon2025 · 1 citations
  4. 4Evaluation of ChatGPT-4.5 and DeepSeek-V3-R1 in answering patient-centered questions about orthognathic surgery: a comparative study across two languages2025 · 1 citations
  5. 5Evaluating ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0 in Oral Medicine and Radiology: A Comparative Query-Based Cross-sectional Study2025 · 4 citations