aceModerate evidence
Published recordHealthThe Trace
More
Effectiveness of Humanized AI Avatars and Messenger Gender for Dental Postprocedure Instructions: Two Randomized Experiments
- Truvace record
- TRV-2026-2583raw data (JSON)
- Version
- v1Published
- First published
- Evidence type
- Randomized controlled trial
- Sources
- 1 sourcePeer-reviewed
- sha256
- eaad3a8614c8…check it
Background: Postcare instructions play a vital role in preventive health care. Traditionally, information on post-dental procedure care is provided through printed leaflets or brief verbal explanations, which often fail to engage patients or ensure adherence. In contrast, emerging artificial intelligence (AI) systems designed to emulate human interaction represent a promising yet understudied approach to improving patient communication and understanding. Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness of AI-ge…
57Gain side
How the two sides scoreClose call
59Problem side
The gain
In an online randomized experiment of 650 US adults, a humanized AI avatar delivering dental implant aftercare instructions matched a real person on intention to comply (mean 6.53 vs 6.52 out of 7) and on comprehension.
The problem
In the same 650-person experiment, participants who watched an animated AI avatar reported lower intention to follow aftercare instructions (mean 6.27 vs 6.52) and to return to the same dentist (5.97 vs 6.48) than those who watched a real person.
A fixed formula sets both scores from the evidence and its sources. Reader votes don’t move them.
What the scores mean
G is the gain side, out of 100. It goes up when the gain is specific, when it measurably helped people and when the sources behind it are strong.
P is the problem side, out of 100. It goes up when the problem is specific, when it measurably hurt people and when the sources behind it are strong.
What this doesn’t fix
The experiments covered one clinical scenario (dental implant aftercare) with English-speaking US participants who identified as men or women, measured only stated intentions, and experiment 2 had no human control group, so it cannot show whether women's preference for the man avatar is specific to AI.
Sources
1 on file- JMIR AIdoi:10.2196/85621
Cite this record
v1Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-2583, v1: “Effectiveness of Humanized AI Avatars and Messenger Gender for Dental Postprocedure Instructions: Two Randomized Experiments.” Truvace, 2026-11-12. /record/TRV-2026-2583 (accessed on the day you copy it). sha256 eaad3a8614c813f5…
Change history
1 versionEvery change made to this record since it was first published, and why. Nothing has changed since it went up.
Certified into the record
Check this record hasn’t been altered
How to check it yourself, without trusting this page
Download any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-2583 and hash its canonical field yourself, for example with shasum -a 256. You should get its content_hash. Each version’s text also ends with prev:and the hash of the version before it (version 1 points to 64 zeros). If anyone had changed a single character of any version after it was saved, those hashes wouldn’t line up.