Proficiency of artificial intelligence in addressing patient frequently asked questions on oral lichen planus.

Authors

Ruijie Zhang, Li Mei, Melody Liu, Olivia Liong, Leo Liu, Lu Jiang, Qianming Chen, Ajith Polonowita, Guangzhao Guan

Published in

Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology. Jul 07, 2026. Epub Jul 07, 2026.

Abstract

To investigate the proficiency of artificial intelligence (ChatGPT-4 and DeepSeek-v3) in responding to frequently asked questions (FAQs) related to oral lichen planus (OLP).
Twenty-three OLP-related FAQs were adapted from known sources. Responses generated by ChatGPT-4 and DeepSeek-v3 were assessed by expert panels across 5 domains: accuracy, comprehensibility, logic, fairness, and simplicity.
DeepSeek-v3 outperformed ChatGPT-4 in comprehensiveness (4.65 ± 0.37 vs 4.04 ± 0.54; P < .001), logic (4.41 ± 0.32 vs 4.03 ± 0.35; P < .001), and fairness (4.34 ± 0.33 vs 4.03 ± 0.27; P < .001). ChatGPT-4 scored higher in simplicity (4.25 ± 0.31 vs 4.04 ± 0.28; P = .034), while DeepSeek-v3 had a modest advantage in accuracy (4.49 ± 0.38 vs 4.22 ± 0.34; P = .025). DeepSeek-v3 performed better in comprehensiveness and logic for "Causes" and "Symptoms," and in accuracy for "Risk & Complications." ChatGPT-4's simplicity was most evident in "Causes" and "Symptoms." In "Treatment & Management," DeepSeek-v3 excelled in logic and comprehensiveness, while ChatGPT-4 showed greater simplicity and occasional accuracy.
ChatGPT-4 provides concise, accessible information, whereas DeepSeek-v3 offers broader, more detailed responses. Combining both models may improve patient understanding of OLP.

PMID:
42823233
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 02 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.