Parental concerns about oral health of children: Is ChatGPT helpful in finding appropriate answers?
Neeraj Gugnani,Inder Kumar Pandit,Monika Gupta,Shalini Gugnani,Simran Kathuria
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_110_24
2024-04-01
Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry
Abstract:ABSTRACT Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming an important part of our lives owing to increased data availability and improved power of computing. One of the recently launched modalities of AI, ChatGPT, is being enormously used worldwide for different types of tasks. In medical context, its use is being explored for clinical queries, academia, research help, etc. Further, literature suggests that parents seek information about health of their children using different Internet resources and would surely turn toward ChatGPT for the same, as this chatbot model is easy to use, generates “one” response, and is available without any subscription. ChatGPT generates a response using text cues and applying different algorithms on prepublished literature but is still in its naïve state; hence, it is imperative to validate the generated responses. Accordingly, we planned this study to determine the clarity, correctness, and completeness of some Frequently asked questions (FAQs) about child’s oral health, from a mother’s perspective. Methods: The study design was a vignette-based survey and included a set of 23 questions, for which ChatGPT was interviewed from the perspective of an imaginary parent. The answers responded by ChatGPT were copied “verbatim,” and a Google survey form was designed. The survey form was validated and then sent to 15 pediatric dentists, and the responses were mainly collected on the Likert’s scale with a provision of one open-ended question aiming to determine “what they would have added” to this generated response as an expert in the field. Results: The responses on Likert’s scale were condensed and values ≥4 were considered ‘adequate and acceptable’ while scores ≤3, were considered ‘inadequate’. The generated responses and comments mentioned by different respondents in the open-ended question were critiqued in reference to the existing literature. Conclusion: Overall, the responses were found to be complete and logical and in clear language, with only some inadequacies being reported in few of the answers.