Large language models (LLMs) have gained popularity among dental students for generating subject-related answers. However, their widespread use raises significant concerns about misinformation. This systematic review aims to critically evaluate studies assessing the performance of LLMs in dentistry. A comprehensive electronic search was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Saudi Digital Library to identify studies published up to September 2024. The study quality was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). A total of 2030 studies have been identified. After removing 907 duplicate records, 1123 studies remained for screening. Ultimately, 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Approximately half of these studies were classified as "high risk," while the remainder were classified as "low risk." The applicability of the findings was rated as "low concern." The primary limitations of LLMs include their inability to specify information sources and their tendency to generate fabricated citations. Based on this review, LLMs hold promise as supplementary educational tools in dentistry. Evidence indicates that students using LLMs may achieve improved academic performance compared to traditional methods. However, concerns about occasional inaccuracies and unreliable citations underscore the need for further research, integration with validated sources, and adherence to ethical guidelines. Ultimately, LLMs should be viewed as complementary tools within dental education, with careful consideration of their limitations.

Background: In recent years, there has been remarkable growth in AI-based applications in healthcare, with a significant breakthrough marked by the launch of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and Google Bard. Patients and health professional students commonly utilize these models due to their accessibility. The increasing use of LLMs in healthcare necessitates an evaluation of their ability to generate accurate and reliable responses. Objective: This study assessed the performance of LLMs in answering orthodontic-related queries through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted up to 31 October 2024. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST), and R Studio software (Version 4.4.0) was employed for meta-analysis and heterogeneity assessment. Results: Out of 278 retrieved articles, 10 studies were included. The most commonly used LLM was ChatGPT (10/10, 100% of papers), followed by Google’s Bard/Gemini (3/10, 30% of papers), and Microsoft’s Bing/Copilot AI (2/10, 20% of papers). Accuracy was primarily evaluated using Likert scales, while the DISCERN tool was frequently applied for reliability assessment. The meta-analysis indicated that the LLMs, such as ChatGPT-4 and other models, do not significantly differ in generating responses to queries related to the specialty of orthodontics. The forest plot revealed a Standard Mean Deviation of 0.01 [CI: 0.42–0.44]. No heterogeneity was observed between the experimental group (ChatGPT-3.5, Gemini, and Copilot) and the control group (ChatGPT-4). However, most studies exhibited a high PROBAST risk of bias due to the lack of standardized evaluation tools. Conclusions: ChatGPT-4 has been extensively used for a variety of tasks and has demonstrated advanced and encouraging outcomes compared to other LLMs, and thus can be regarded as a valuable tool for enhancing educational and learning experiences. While LLMs can generate comprehensive responses, their reliability is compromised by the absence of peer-reviewed references, necessitating expert oversight in healthcare applications.

The cranial base has a crucial effect on the position of the maxilla and mandible. This study aims to investigate the relationship between the cranial base sagittal and transverse dimensions in different skeletal patterns. This is a retrospective study of pre-existing CBCT images of 132 subjects (60 males and 72 females) from Saudi Arabia with a mean age of 35 years old. The grouping of the subjects was based on the ANB angle of Steiner’s analysis. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the means of the sagittal and transverse dimensions between different skeletal patterns, followed by a post hoc test for individual comparisons. Logistic regression analysis was performed to test the relationship between gender, age, and cephalometric values between the three groups. The significance level was 0.05. One-way ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference in posterior cranial base length (p < 0.05) and total cranial base length (p < 0.05) among different skeletal patterns. Tukey’s post hoc analysis showed that skeletal class II had a smaller posterior cranial base and total cranial base length when compared to the other groups. The class II skeletal pattern has a smaller posterior cranial base and total cranial base when compared to skeletal class I and class III skeletal patterns.

Methods for retracting the anterior teeth are divided into frictional methods and non-frictional methods. However, evidence regarding the superiority of one technique over the other is still lacking in the available literature. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of frictional methods of anterior teeth retraction compared to the non-frictional ones. The extracted data included the mechanism of application of the retraction force and its intensity, the observation period, follow-up records, and outcome measures. Ten studies were included in this review; the results did not favor a specific technique regarding the rate of orthodontic tooth movement and loss of anchorage during canine retraction, although a preference was shown for the sliding technique in the rate of en-masse retraction (0.74 versus 0.39 mm/month) and the anchorage control during the retraction of the incisors (0.5 versus 0.1 mm/month). The control of the incisor’s torque during the en-masse retraction was higher when frictionless techniques were used (−12° versus −7°). Regarding the rate of orthodontic tooth movement, the non-frictional technique is characterized by a high sensitivity to the quality of the design, and the sliding technique was generally effective. As for controlling the torque of the incisors, the preference is for the non-frictional technique. Overall, there is a need to conduct more studies with an appropriate design.

Craniofacial growth and development are more than a scientific curiosity; it is of tremendous interest to clinicians. Insights into the genetic etiology of cleft lip and palate development are essential for improving diagnosis and treatment planning. The purpose of this systematic review was to utilize a zebrafish model to highlight the role of the IRF6 gene in cleft lip and palate development in humans. This review adhered to the guidelines outlined in the PRISMA statement. Nine studies were included in the analysis. This study used major scientific databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Zebrafish Information Network and yielded 1275 articles. Two reviewers performed the screening using COVIDENCE™ independently, and a third reviewer resolved any conflicts. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria and screening, nine studies were included in the analysis. The Systematic Review Center for Laboratory Animal Experimentation's (SYRCLE's) risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the quality of the included studies. The main outcome supports the role of the IRF6 gene in zebrafish periderm development and embryogenesis, and IRF6 variations result in cleft lip and palate development. The overall SYRCLE risk of bias was low-medium. In conclusion, this review indicated the critical role of the IRF6 gene and its downstream genes (GRHL3, KLF17, and ESRP1/2) in the development of cleft lip and palate in zebrafish models. Genetic mutation zebrafish models provide a high level of insights into zebrafish craniofacial development. this review provides a productive avenue for understanding the powerful and conserved zebrafish model for investigating the pathogenesis of human cleft lip and palate.

OBJECTIVES: The study aims to measure the mandibular condylar height (CH), ramus height (RH), total height (CH+RH), asymmetry index, and condylar volume (Cvol) in individuals with different anteroposterior and vertical skeletal discrepancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of 131 subjects (60 females and 71 males) with a mean age of 35.06 ± 12.79 years. Pre-existing CBCT images were divided into groups according to the anteroposterior and vertical skeletal discrepancies. The investigator analyzed the data using t-tests to assess the mandibular bilateral sides of the individuals and gender differences. The mean difference between groups was determined using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The Chi-square test was used to study the association between the asymmetry index and groups. RESULTS: Each individual's bilateral sides exhibited statistically significant differences in CH, RH, and Cvol (P = 0.033, P = 0.039, P = 0.005, respectively), but not in CH+RH (P = 0.458). There were, however, statistically significant gender differences in CH+RH (P < 0.001). Skeletal Class III and hypodivergent groups revealed the highest linear and volumetric values compared to other groups. The asymmetry index was increased in CH (P = 0.006) and Cvol (P = 0.002) in skeletal Class II subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in CH, RH, and Cvol were found on the right and left sides of the same individual. This study found increased linear and volumetric values in males, skeletal Class III, and hypodivergent subjects. Class II individuals had an increased CH and Cvol asymmetry index. This study highlights in-depth knowledge of mandibular asymmetry, which is extremely important to achieve an accurate diagnosis and provide the best treatment outcome.