Evidence Hub

Evaluating retrieval-augmented generation for guideline-grounded textual planning in implant dentistry: A comparative study

Chen J, Wang F

Journal of dentistry, 2026

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) framework can enhance citation precision and improve the clinical reliability of large language models (LLMs) in implant dentistry.

METHODS: A domain-specific knowledge base was constructed using major international consensus reports and established clinical treatment guides. Forty standardized clinical vignettes (35 real-world, 5 synthetic) were each processed twice by both a standard LLM (GPT-4o) and a RAG-LLM, yielding 160 treatment plans. Intra-model agreement was quantified using the weighted Cohen's kappa. Two independent experts evaluated the plans across five clinical domains using a double-blinded, consensus-driven protocol.

RESULTS: Overall clinical accuracy showed no significant difference between models (P = 0.642). However, domain-specific analysis revealed that the RAG-LLM significantly outperformed the standard model in evidence traceability and citation precision (P = 0.046). Neither model exhibited severe literature fabrication. Conversely, the standard LLM demonstrated superior biomechanical spatial planning (P = 0.025). The RAG architecture exhibited "retrieval bias" in soft-tissue complication scenarios, leading to inappropriate hard-tissue augmentation. Sensitivity analysis revealed the RAG model's superiority diminished in out-of-distribution synthetic cases lacking thematic overlap with the knowledge base.

CONCLUSIONS: Implementing RAG significantly improves evidence traceability,…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free