Scholarlink

Background <p>Large language models (LLMs) have been extensively used in the past 5&#xa0;years. Generative pre-trained transformers based on LLM algorithms, such as ChatGPT, became a paradigm shift in the medical field, including specialties such as Forensic Odontology. The accuracy of their responses to technical commands, however, is debatable. This study aimed to assess the quality of ChatGPT responses through the lenses of experts in Forensic Odontology. Eleven prompt commands were presented individually to ChatGPT™ 3.5 (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA, USA). The commands had three designs, (I) textual objective (<i>n</i> = 3), (II) numeric objective (<i>n</i> = 4), and subjective (<i>n</i> = 4), and addressed three main topics of Forensic Odontology—dental human identification, dental age estimation, and bite mark analysis. The responses obtained from the chatbot were presented to 19 experts in Forensic Odontology (all academic professionals) so they could rate the quality of the responses with a 5-point Likert scale.</p> Results <p>The responses were rated moderate, bad, or very bad in 60% of the cases. Textual objective commands had an accuracy of 55.78%, numeric objective commands had an accuracy of 68.94%, and subjective commands reached an accuracy of 63.94%. The best answers were provided to dental human identification commands (69.47%), followed by dental age estimation (67.01%) and bite mark analysis (63.15%).</p> Conclusions <p>In its current form, ChatGPT 3.5 is not able to provide fully reliable information to the self-study process of Forensic Odontology when deeper layers of knowledge are required. The chatbot can be, however, a supplement to respond to more objective and superficial commands that do not depend on deep search, contextual analysis, and detailed descriptions based on scientific articles.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Experts’ opinion following ChatGPT’s responses to prompts on Forensic Odontology—preliminary investigation

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月16日

查看全文
  • Júlia Pires Baptista,
  • Diana Carolina da Costa Silva,
  • Oksana Avdeenko,
  • Cezar Capitaneanu,
  • Ademir Franco

摘要

Background

Large language models (LLMs) have been extensively used in the past 5 years. Generative pre-trained transformers based on LLM algorithms, such as ChatGPT, became a paradigm shift in the medical field, including specialties such as Forensic Odontology. The accuracy of their responses to technical commands, however, is debatable. This study aimed to assess the quality of ChatGPT responses through the lenses of experts in Forensic Odontology. Eleven prompt commands were presented individually to ChatGPT™ 3.5 (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA, USA). The commands had three designs, (I) textual objective (n = 3), (II) numeric objective (n = 4), and subjective (n = 4), and addressed three main topics of Forensic Odontology—dental human identification, dental age estimation, and bite mark analysis. The responses obtained from the chatbot were presented to 19 experts in Forensic Odontology (all academic professionals) so they could rate the quality of the responses with a 5-point Likert scale.

Results

The responses were rated moderate, bad, or very bad in 60% of the cases. Textual objective commands had an accuracy of 55.78%, numeric objective commands had an accuracy of 68.94%, and subjective commands reached an accuracy of 63.94%. The best answers were provided to dental human identification commands (69.47%), followed by dental age estimation (67.01%) and bite mark analysis (63.15%).

Conclusions

In its current form, ChatGPT 3.5 is not able to provide fully reliable information to the self-study process of Forensic Odontology when deeper layers of knowledge are required. The chatbot can be, however, a supplement to respond to more objective and superficial commands that do not depend on deep search, contextual analysis, and detailed descriptions based on scientific articles.