IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0339908.html

Comparing large language models and search engine responses to common orthodontic questions

Author

Listed:
  • Yuanyuan Ren
  • Jing Sun

Abstract

Background: Large Language Models (LLMs) highlight their potential in supporting patient education and self-management. Their performance in responses to orthodontic questions has yet to be explored. Objectives: This study aims to compare the quality, empathy, readability, and satisfaction of responses from LLMs and search engines on common orthodontic questions. Methods: Forty-five common orthodontic questions (six categories) and a prompt were developed, and a self-designed multidimensional evaluation questionnaire was constructed. Questions were presented to 5 LLMs and 3 search engines on December,22,2024. The primary outcomes were the median expert-rated scores of LLMs versus search engine responses on quality, empathy, readability, and satisfaction, using 5- or 10-point Likert scales. Results: LLMs scored significantly higher than search engines in quality (4.00 vs. 3.50, p

Suggested Citation

  • Yuanyuan Ren & Jing Sun, 2026. "Comparing large language models and search engine responses to common orthodontic questions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(1), pages 1-13, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0339908
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0339908
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339908
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339908&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0339908?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0339908. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.