Dental Evidence vs. a general AI chatbot
ChatGPT writes clinical answers from training memory, so its citations are sometimes real and sometimes invented. We search the dental literature first and answer from the passages we find. Click any reference and read the study yourself.
Dental Evidence
We pull passages out of a curated dental corpus when you ask, then build the answer from them. A document sits behind each sentence.
General LLM
The model recalls text from its training weights and writes the answer from that memory. It has no document to point back to.
Dental Evidence
References sit inline, in the sentence they support. Open one and read the passage the claim came from.
General LLM
The model generates its citations the same way it generates the prose. A title, journal, and DOI can look right and lead nowhere.
Dental Evidence
Peer-reviewed dental literature, and only under licences that let us serve you the passage. We curate one clinical topic at a time.
General LLM
The model read whatever sat on the open web during training, so forums, marketing pages, and SEO content rank beside the journals.
Dental Evidence
A dentist founded the product and dentists review it. A clinician admits each source, and we hold a topic back until real clinical phrasings return the right evidence.
General LLM
Non-clinicians tuned the model for general safety. No dentist looked at any part of the pipeline.
Dental Evidence
Social search puts curated posts from vetted clinicians beside the answer, quoted verbatim and attributed. We keep them out of the evidence.
General LLM
The model blends anecdote and evidence into one confident paragraph, and you cannot tell which is which.
Dental Evidence
We say so in the answer. It names the small samples, the lab-only findings, and the studies that disagree.
General LLM
The model writes a fluent answer either way. Its confidence does not track the strength of the evidence underneath.
Dental Evidence
We admit laboratory work as laboratory work and never let it support a claim about what happens to a patient.
General LLM
The model collapses in-vitro results and clinical outcomes into a single recommendation.
Dental Evidence
Brand-to-brand comparisons grounded in the material record, with the evidence attached to each claim.
General LLM
The model's brand knowledge stopped at its training cutoff, so it presents discontinued products and old formulations as current.
Dental Evidence
Chart notes, insurance narratives, post-op handouts, and cited workflows, built from the same referenced evidence.
General LLM
Generic drafts you have to verify line by line before anything reaches a chart or a payer.
How it works
RAG framework
We expand your question into the vocabulary the literature uses and match it against the corpus by meaning and by term. The model reads the winning passages and answers from them, or it tells you it cannot.
References
References sit inline, in the sentence they support, rather than in a bibliography at the end. Each one resolves to the passage behind that sentence, so you can judge the study before you act on it.
Social search
Posts from a reviewed roster of clinicians sit beside the answer, quoted verbatim and attributed to the account that wrote them. They show you what colleagues do. Nothing from the social lane reaches the evidence or the answer.
Dentist reviewed
Dentists admit sources one clinical question at a time and throw out opinion polls and awareness surveys. We count a topic as covered once we probe it with the phrasing clinicians use and read the result passage by passage.
Dentist founded
A dentist founded Dental Evidence, and we limit accounts to dentists. We test the product against the questions you ask between patients.
Clinical judgment
We do not diagnose or treat. We put the strongest available evidence and its limits in front of you, with the sources open, before the patient is numb.
Exclusively for dentists
Seven days of full access, no payment method required. Bring a real case and check the references yourself.