A Comparative Study of Responses to Retina Questions from Either Experts, Expert-Edited Large Language Models, or Expert-Edited Large Language Models Alone

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality, empathy, and safety of expert edited large language model (LLM), human expert created, and LLM responses to common retina patient questions. DESIGN: Randomized, masked multicenter study. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one common retina patient questions were randomly assigned among 13 retina specialists. METHODS: Each expert created a response (Expert) and then edited a LLM (ChatGPT-4)-generated response to that question (Expert + artificial intelligence [AI]), timing themselves for both tasks. Five LLMs (ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, Claude 2, Bing, and Bard) also generated responses to each question. The original question along with anonymized and randomized Expert + AI, Expert, and LLM responses were evaluated by the other experts who did not write an expert response to the question. Evaluators judged quality and empathy (very poor, poor, acceptable, good, or very good) along with safety metrics (incorrect information, likelihood to cause harm, extent of harm, and missing content). MAIN OUTCOME: Mean quality and empathy score, proportion of responses with incorrect information, likelihood to cause harm, extent of harm, and missing content for each response type. RESULTS: There were 4008 total grades collected (2608 for quality and empathy; 1400 for safety metrics), with significant differences in both quality and empathy ( CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized, masked, multicenter study, LLM responses were comparable with experts in terms of quality, empathy, and safety metrics, warranting further exploration of their potential benefits in clinical settings. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of the article

Sensory Input Pathways and Mechanisms in Swallowing: A Review

Over the past 20 years, research on the physiology of swallowing has confirmed that the oropharyngeal swallowing process can be modulated, both volitionally and in response to different sensory stimuli. In this review we identify what is known regarding the sensory pathways and mechanisms that are now thought to influence swallowing motor control and evoke its response. By synthesizing the current state of research evidence and knowledge, we identify continuing gaps in our knowledge of these mechanisms and pose questions for future research

Characterization of Functional and Structural Integrity in Experimental Focal Epilepsy: Reduced Network Efficiency Coincides with White Matter Changes

BACKGROUND: Although focal epilepsies are increasingly recognized to affect multiple and remote neural systems, the underlying spatiotemporal pattern and the relationships between recurrent spontaneous seizures, global functional connectivity, and structural integrity remain largely unknown. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Here we utilized serial resting-state functional MRI, graph-theoretical analysis of complex brain networks and diffusion tensor imaging to characterize the evolution of global network topology, functional connectivity and structural changes in the interictal brain in relation to focal epilepsy in a rat model. Epileptic networks exhibited a more regular functional topology than controls, indicated by a significant increase in shortest path length and clustering coefficient. Interhemispheric functional connectivity in epileptic brains decreased, while intrahemispheric functional connectivity increased. Widespread reductions of fractional anisotropy were found in white matter regions not restricted to the vicinity of the epileptic focus, including the corpus callosum. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our longitudinal study on the pathogenesis of network dynamics in epileptic brains reveals that, despite the locality of the epileptogenic area, epileptic brains differ in their global network topology, connectivity and structural integrity from healthy brains

Bond Durability of Two-Step HEMA-Free Universal Adhesive

The purpose of this study is to compare bond durability, in terms of fatigue bond strength, of a two-step HEMA-free universal adhesive and representative adhesives in each systematic category. The adhesives used in this study were OptiBond FL, Prime&Bond NT, Clearfil SE Bond 2, G2-Bond Universal, and Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive. Fatigue bond strength testing and scanning electron microscopy analysis of adhesively bonded enamel and dentin interfaces were performed. For the adhesives in etch-and-rinse mode, the enamel fatigue bond strength of the G2-Bond Universal adhesive was significantly higher than those of other adhesives, and the dentin fatigue bond strength of Prime&Bond NT was significantly lower than the others. For adhesives in self-etch mode, the enamel fatigue bond strengths of Clearfil SE Bond 2 and G2-Bond Universal were significantly higher than that of the Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive, and the dentin fatigue bond strength of G2-Bond Universal was significantly higher than Clearfil SE Bond 2 and the Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive. The two-step HEMA-free universal adhesive showed higher enamel and higher or equal dentin fatigue bond strength than other selected representative adhesive systems in etch-and-rinse mode and higher or equal enamel and higher dentin fatigue bond strength than adhesive systems in self-etch mode

Round robin test: wear of nine dental restorative materials in six different wear simulators - supplement to the round robin test of 2005.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to submit the same materials that were tested in the round robin wear test of 2002/2003 to the Alabama wear method. METHODS: Nine restorative materials, seven composites (belleGlass, Chromasit, Estenia, Heliomolar, SureFil, Targis, Tetric Ceram) an amalgam (Amalcap) and a ceramic (IPS Empress) have been submitted to the Alabama wear method for localized and generalized wear. The test centre did not know which brand they were testing. Both volumetric and vertical loss had been determined with an optical sensor. After completion of the wear test, the raw data were sent to IVOCLAR for further analysis. The statistical analysis of the data included logarithmic transformation of the data, the calculation of relative ranks of each material within each test centre, measures of agreement between methods, the discrimination power and coefficient of variation of each method as well as measures of the consistency and global performance for each material. RESULTS: Relative ranks of the materials varied tremendously between the test centres. When all materials were taken into account and the test methods compared with each other, only ACTA agreed reasonably well with two other methods, i.e. OHSU and ZURICH. On the other hand, MUNICH did not agree with the other methods at all. The ZURICH method showed the lowest discrimination power, ACTA, IVOCLAR and ALABAMA localized the highest. Material-wise, the best global performance was achieved by the leucite reinforced ceramic material Empress, which was clearly ahead of belleGlass, SureFil and Estenia. In contrast, Heliomolar, Tetric Ceram and especially Chromasit demonstrated a poor global performance. The best consistency was achieved by SureFil, Tetric Ceram and Chromasit, whereas the consistency of Amalcap and Heliomolar was poor. When comparing the laboratory data with clinical data, a significant agreement was found for the IVOCLAR and ALABAMA generalized wear method. SIGNIFICANCE: As the different wear simulator settings measure different wear mechanisms, it seems reasonable to combine at least two different wear settings to assess the wear resistance of a new material