aceDifferential Diagnosis Performance of ChatGPT in Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology
Objective: To evaluate ChatGPT (GPT-5.1) for ranked differential diagnoses in oral and maxillofacial pathology, assess image effects on diagnostic performance and examine output stability across repeated runs. Methods: This retrospective diagnostic accuracy study included 160 biopsy-confirmed cases. Cases were evaluated using a standardised prompt under two conditions: text-only and text plus clinical photographs and/or radiographs. Each case underwent three independent runs. Performance was measured using Top-1…
ChatGPT listed the biopsy-confirmed diagnosis first in only about 43 to 44 percent of oral and maxillofacial pathology cases, and adding clinical images did not significantly improve accuracy, so it is not reliable enough for clinical decision support.
The authors note that heterogeneous and non-standardised visual inputs may have limited detection of any benefit from adding images, so the lack of an image effect may not be conclusive.
Evidence
- Peer-reviewedOral Diseases2026-10-19
How should this claim be treated?
Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-2004, v1: “Differential Diagnosis Performance of ChatGPT in Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology.” Truvace, 2026-10-20. /record/TRV-2026-2004 (accessed at citation time). sha256 0bc02721a17c8dd0…
Calibration history
Every change to this record since certification, in the open. None yet — the reading has held since it entered the record.
Certified into the record
How to verify without trusting this page
Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-2004 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.