# Comparative Evaluation of Accuracy, Completeness and Readability of Common Patient Queries Related to Prosthodontic Treatment by Two Artificial Intelligence Models (ChatGPT-4o and Gemini)

## TL;DR

This study compared how well ChatGPT-4o and Gemini answered common patient questions about prosthodontic treatments, finding Gemini more accurate and complete, while ChatGPT was easier to understand.

## Contribution

The study provides a comparative evaluation of two AI models on prosthodontic patient queries, focusing on accuracy, completeness, and readability.

## Key findings

- Gemini scored higher in completeness and accuracy than ChatGPT.
- Gemini's responses had a higher readability level, indicating more technical content.
- ChatGPT was found to be more accessible for general audiences.

## Abstract

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) is fundamentally characterized by the capacity of computer systems to execute tasks that traditionally require human intelligence through the application of sophisticated algorithms. The coming years are bound to witness an increase in the number of people relying on the AI language models for initial health-related queries. The reasons may include increased credibility of AI models, convenience and privacy, initial knowledge acquisition before their visit to a doctor and guidance regarding treatment options.

Aim: The aim of the study was to compare the performance of two commonly used AI models, Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT-4o, OpenAI, San Francisco, United States) and Google Gemini Flash 2.5 (Google Bard, Google DeepMind, Mountain View, California, United States), in responding to common patient queries related to prosthodontic treatments and evaluate their responses in terms of accuracy, completeness, generation time, length and readability.

Materials and methods: In this study, 30 open-ended questions that are frequently asked by patients visiting prosthodontists were collected. Ten questions each from the domains (removable (partial and complete), fixed partial dentures and dental implantology) were submitted to both AI models: ChatGPT 4o and Google Gemini Flash 2.5. Four experts in the field of Prosthodontics with a minimum of 20 years’ experience, who were blinded to the study, evaluated the accuracy and completeness of the responses from the models. Accuracy, completeness, generation time, length and readability of the responses generated by the two AI models were compared using the Likert scale and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index.

Results: The comparison of outputs from two AI systems evaluated illustrated that Model B (Gemini) achieved 0.25 higher completeness and accuracy scores compared to Model A (ChatGPT). In terms of readability, Gemini generated outputs with a median SMOG index 1.46 points higher than ChatGPT (p = 0.004), suggesting a more advanced reading level.

Conclusion: Gemini demonstrated superior performance compared to ChatGPT, delivering more professional and technical content, while ChatGPT was more accessible and comprehensible for non-professionals and the general public.