Sep 2026· APOS Trends in Orthodontics· 0 citations· 20 references
TL;DR
Large language models can provide appropriate patient-facing information about clear aligner therapy, though meaningful differences in communication quality and empathy exist, though meaningful differences in communication quality and empathy exist.
Abstract
Patients considering clear aligner therapy should understand treatment requirements, limitations, and the importance of professional supervision. As many patients now seek orthodontic information from artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, this study evaluated how effectively these systems communicate patient-facing information related to clear aligner therapy.
Twenty common patient-facing questions about clear aligner therapy were developed using conversational language. Three large language models (LLM), ChatGPT 5.2, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and Gemini Flash 3, generated responses using default settings. Three orthodontic specialists, blinded to model identity, rated responses for quality and empathy using 5-point Likert scales. Readability was assessed using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (2,1). Model performance was compared using repeated-measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni-adjusted
post hoc
testing.
Inter-rater reliability ranged from fair to good. Significant differences were observed among models for quality (F[2,38] = 11.43;
p
< 0.001) and empathy (F[2,38] = 3.92;
p
= 0.028), while readability did not differ significantly (
p
= 0.321). Gemini Flash 3 achieved the highest mean scores for both quality (4.57 ± 0.42) and empathy (4.28 ± 0.51). All models consistently encouraged professional orthodontic consultation and avoided recommending unsupervised treatment.
Large language models can provide appropriate patient-facing information about clear aligner therapy, though meaningful differences in communication quality and empathy exist. Clinical oversight remains essential when integrating AI tools into orthodontic patient education.
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· Journal of International Den...· 0 citations
Background: Patients now consult large language models (LLMs) for orthodontic concerns, but most evaluations sit in English and focus on factual accuracy. We compared three current LLMs (Claude Opus 4.5, GPT-4o, Gemini 2.5 Flash) on patient-facing responses in English and Turkish, and tested whether model differences h...
Mustafa Özcan, Ferdi Allaf· Healthcare· 0 citations
Background/Objective: As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to obtain oral health information, their ability to provide accurate and comprehensive responses to patient-focused periodontal questions derived from commonly reported misconceptions is increasingly relevant to patient education. This study ai...
İsmail Gül, Resül Çolak, Merve Küçükoğlu Çolak et al.· Diagnostics· 0 citations
There may be significant differences in how effectively LLMs support patients with surgical queries, particularly in areas needing detailed explanation, and usually required minimal clarification in areas needing detailed explanation.
T. Davis, B. Guevel, K. Logishetty et al.· Annals of the Royal College...· 0 citations
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· Journal of Stomatology Oral...· 0 citations
The evaluated LLMs showed small and method-dependent differences in DISCERN-based information quality and variable differences in readability, but the findings should not be interpreted as evidence of factual accuracy, clinical safety, or suitability for individualized decision-making.
Oktay Polat, Berk Koncalıoğlu, Mert Gündoğdu et al.· Healthcare· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.