This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, reliability, and clarity of information provided by artificial intelligence (AI)-based language models regarding botulinum toxin applications for bruxism treatment. Eighty-five open-ended questions were developed under 7 specific domains by a team comprising an oral and maxillofacial surgeon and 2 orthodontists. These domains included indications, contraindications, procedures, complications, prognoses, advantages, and disadvantages of botulinum toxin use in bruxism treatment. The questions were input into 3 AI chatbots: ChatGPT-4.0, Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot. The generated responses were independently evaluated by the researchers through 5 predefined accuracy categories: “Objectively True,” “Selected Facts,” “Minimal Facts,” “Incorrect,” and “Misleading.” Statistical analysis, including χ 2 and the Fisher exact tests, was conducted to assess differences in response accuracy among the AI models, with significance set at P <0.05. A statistically significant association was found between the AI model and response accuracy ( P <0.001). ChatGPT-4.0 predominantly delivered answers classified as “Objectively True,” surpassing Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot. Across all domains, ChatGPT-4.0 maintained higher rates of accurate responses, whereas Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot frequently provided answers categorized as “Selected Facts” or “Minimal Facts.” While AI-based language models, particularly ChatGPT-4.0, may serve as a useful adjunct for preliminary patient education and professional reference regarding botulinum toxin use in bruxism, they cannot replace evidence-based clinical judgment. Practitioners should remain vigilant about the risk of misinformation and ensure validation of AI-generated content against established guidelines and authoritative sources before applying it in patient care.
Zi̇nci̇r et al. (Tue,) studied this question.