Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Comparison of ChatGPT and Google in addressing patients’ questions on robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty
0
Zitationen
7
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare ChatGPT (Generative Pre-Trained Transformer) and Google in addressing frequently asked questions (FAQs), answers, and online sources regarding robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: , 2024, the 20 most FAQs were identified by inputting the search term "Robot-Assisted Total Hip Replacement" into both Google Search and ChatGPT-4o. Twenty FAQs were independently identified using a clean Google search and a prompt to ChatGPT-4o. The FAQs on Google were sourced from the "People also ask" section, while ChatGPT was requested to generate the 20 most often asked questions. All questions, answers, and references cited were recorded. A modified version of the Rothwell system was used to categorize questions into 10 subtopics: special activities, timeline of recovery, restrictions, technical details, cost, indications/management, risks and complications, pain, longevity, and evaluation of surgery. Each reference was categorized into the following groups: commercial, academic, medical practice, single surgeon personal, or social media. Responses were also graded as "excellent response not requiring clarification" (1), "satisfactory requiring minimal clarification" (2), "satisfactory requiring moderate clarification" (3), or "unsatisfactory requiring substantial clarification" (4). RESULTS: Overall, 20% of the questions that Google and ChatGPT-4o considered as the most FAQ were similar to each other. Technical details (35%) were the most common categories of questions. The ChatGPT provided significantly more academic references than Google search (70% vs. 20%, p=0.0113). Conversely, Google web search cited more medical practice references (40% vs. 0%, p=0.0033), single surgeon websites (20% vs. 0%, p=0.1060), and government websites (10% vs. 0%, p=0.4872) more frequently than ChatGPT. In terms of response quality, 62% of answers were rated as Grade 1-2 (excellent or satisfactory with minimal clarification), while 38% required moderate or substantial clarification (Grades 3-4). CONCLUSION: ChatGPT demonstrated comparable results to those of Google searches on information regarding RATHA, with a higher reliance on academic sources. While most responses were satisfactory, a notable proportion required further clarification, emphasizing the need for continued evaluation of these platforms to ensure accuracy and reliability in patient education. Taken together, these technologies have the capacity to enhance health literacy and provide enhanced shared decision-making for patients seeking information on RATHA.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.652 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.567 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 8.083 Zit.
BioBERT: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining
2019 · 6.856 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.781 Zit.