ChatGPT to help dental students retain knowledge and enhance performance

 I

A study aiming to utilize current dental course materials, syllabi, and textbooks to investigate ChatGPT's potential benefits for dental students. was presented at the 102nd General Session of the IADR, which was held in conjunction with the 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Dental, Oral, and Craniofacial Research and the 48th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for Dental Research, on March 13-16, 2024, in New Orleans, LA, USA.

The abstract, “ChatGPT to Help Dental Students Retain Knowledge and Enhance Performance” was presented during the “SCADA: Clinical Science/Public Health Research” Poster Session that took place on Thursday, March 14, 2024 at 11 a.m. Central Standard Time (UTC-6).

The study, by Ihunna Amugo of Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN, USA, conducted an extensive literature review, analyzing previous studies in different educational contexts to evaluate ChatGPT's efficacy in dental education. Questions aligned with dental course materials and objectives were formulated to ensure ChatGPT's relevance to the specific needs of dental students. The research encompassed various dental courses, including operative dentistry, nutrition, periodontics, oral radiology, and biology of disease.

By applying ChatGPT in these courses, its capabilities were harnessed to generate step-by-step instructions, summaries, and questions to supplement traditional learning methods. Data on students' interactions with ChatGPT were collected and analyzed, assessing usage patterns, engagement levels, and perceived benefits. 

The study's results indicated that ChatGPT has the potential to enhance students' understanding and knowledge retention. In addition, ChatGPT can effectively provide instructional support and generate relevant content for dental students. 

Low-cost liquid tames tooth decay

An inexpensive, cavity-fighting liquid called silver diamine fluoride (SDF) works as well as dental sealants to keep tooth decay at bay in a school cavity prevention and treatment program, according to a new study by researchers at NYU College of Dentistry. 

 

The study, which followed more than 4,000 elementary school students for four years and is published in JAMA Pediatrics, shows that SDF is an effective alternative to sealants, and can increase access to dental care while reducing costs.

 

Dental cavities are the most prevalent chronic disease in children and can lead to pain, school absences, and lower academic performance. To prevent cavities, especially among children less likely to see a dentist, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) supports the use of school sealant programs. In sealant programs, dental professionals visit schools to apply a thin, protective coating to the surface of teeth that hardens and safeguards against decay.

 

SDF has emerged as another promising treatment for fighting cavities. Originally approved by the FDA for treating tooth sensitivity, the solution is brushed onto the surface of teeth, killing decay-causing bacteria and remineralizing teeth to prevent further decay.

 

“A growing body of research shows that SDF—which is quicker to apply and less expensive than sealants—can prevent and arrest cavities, reducing the need for drilling and filling,” said Richard Niederman, DMD, professor of epidemiology & health promotion at NYU College of Dentistry and the study’s senior author.

 

SDF in schools

Researchers at NYU College of Dentistry led CariedAway, the nation’s largest school-based cavity prevention study, to compare the use of SDF and traditional sealants. The study included approximately 4,100 children in New York City elementary schools; more than a quarter of kids had untreated cavities at the start of the study.

 

At each school visit, a team of health professionals examined children’s teeth and applied either sealants or SDF followed by fluoride varnish, depending on which treatment the school was randomly assigned to receive. Sealants were administered by dental hygienists, while SDF was applied by either dental hygienists or registered nurses, all under the supervision of a dentist. Starting in 2018, the team visited each school twice a year, although the COVID-19 pandemic and school closures led to missed visits.

 

The researchers reported last year in the journal JAMA Network Open that a single treatment of either SDF or sealants prevented 80% of cavities and kept 50% of existing cavities from worsening two years later. The team continued their study for another two years, and in their study published in JAMA Pediatrics, found that SDF and sealants prevented roughly the same number of cavities after children were followed for a total of four years. Moreover, both sealants and SDF reduced the risk of decay at each follow-up visit.

 

“Our longitudinal study reaffirms that both sealants and SDF are effective against cavities. SDF is a promising alternative that can support school-based cavity prevention—not to replace the dental sealant model, but as another option that also prevents and arrests decay,” said Ryan Richard Ruff, PhD, MPH, associate professor of epidemiology & health promotion at NYU College of Dentistry and the study’s first author.

 

“Most research shows that SDF can stop a cavity from progressing further. Our study demonstrated that SDF can prevent cavities from happening in the first place,” said Tamarinda Barry Godín, DDS, MPH, associate program director and supervising dentist for CariedAway, research scientist at NYU College of Dentistry, and the study’s coauthor. 

 

An “untapped” oral health workforce

Embracing SDF for cavity prevention and treatment in schools could keep kids from needing fillings, saving families and the healthcare system money. Yet these programs can only succeed if there are enough health professionals to provide care.

 

The NYU researchers found that children who had SDF applied by dental hygienists and registered nurses had similar outcomes, suggesting that nurses—including school nurses—could play a crucial role in cavity prevention programs. 

 

“Nurses may be an untapped resource for addressing oral health inequities,” added Ruff. “Our results suggest that nurses can effectively provide this preventive care, which could dramatically improve access, given the role of school nurses and the size of the nursing workforce.”

Those who report having poor oral health have negative long-term health outcomes

Those who report having poor oral health are as likely to have negative long-term systemic health outcomes as those previously diagnosed with periodontal disease, or gum disease, according to a new Tufts University School of Dental Medicine study published in The Journal of the American Dental Association. 

The researchers examined whether self-reported oral health questions, which are commonly used in the surveillance of periodontal disease, had the same or similar comorbidities of the disease by analyzing data sets from the Women’s Health Study and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The Women’s Health Study followed women 45 years or older with self-reported information on gum disease, oral health questions, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and osteoporosis in various timeframes starting from 1992, while the NHANES included data on oral health questions and linked mortality from 1999 to 2018. 

Led by first author Yau-Hua Yu, associate professor of periodontology at the School of Dental Medicine, the researchers tested their hypotheses by running analyses that estimated the probability of outcomes based on a variety of factors and then looked at survival rates within various groups. The results showed that negative self-evaluations were associated with the same level of systemic comorbidities as those who had been diagnosed with periodontal disease. The study also found that suboptimal dental visits or infrequent flossing were associated with an increase in all-cause mortality.  

“These questions are really helpful to understand a person’s oral health conditions when clinical access is limited,” said Yu, noting that in large epidemiological studies like the Women’s Health Study, it’s not possible to have a dentist on-site to physically examine research participants.

Yu and fellow researchers, including senior author Julie Buring of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, also examined the role that access to dental care plays on overall health. They did this by asking two important questions: “In the past 12 months, have you visited the dentist or hygienist?” and “How often do you visit a dental office for routine check-ups and cleaning?” The researchers found that about 10% of the Women’s Health Study participants and 45% of NHANES study participants did not visit a dentist within a year and, as a result, their oral and overall health outcomes were poor.  

“Our study findings suggest that people who don’t see a dentist may have negative outcomes in terms of mortality,” Yu said, noting that their original goal was to understand the usefulness of these questions for understanding and evaluating gum disease and oral health in general.

Given this demonstrated link between oral health and mortality, Yu suggests primary care physicians consider asking about their patients’ dental habits and condition to get a fuller picture of their overall health.

Yu isn’t stopping with this study. She says she’s still working on big data sets, and hopes to showcase outcomes in different populations, such as veterans. She is currently collaborating with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. 

And, Yu underscores the need for more large-scale national health studies/biobanking efforts to incorporate questions around dental health to better understand and communicate the association between oral health and long-term health outcomes, as well as the gaps in access to dental care.  

“For society in general,” she said, “we need to look at, without dental care access, what is the burden?”