Suppr超能文献

比较不同版本的ChatGPT在告知肩袖损伤患者方面的情况。

Comparison of ChatGPT versions in informing patients with rotator cuff injuries.

作者信息

Günay Ali Eray, Özer Alper, Yazıcı Alparslan, Sayer Gökhan

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Kayseri City Training and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey.

Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Develi State Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey.

出版信息

JSES Int. 2024 May 6;8(5):1016-1018. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2024.04.016. eCollection 2024 Sep.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate whether Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) can be recommended as a resource for informing patients planning rotator cuff repairs, and to assess the differences between ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0 versions in terms of information content and readability.

METHODS

In August 2023, 13 commonly asked questions by patients with rotator cuff disease were posed to ChatGPT 3.5 and ChatGPT 4 programs using different internet protocol computers by 3 experienced surgeons in rotator cuff surgery. After converting the answers of both versions into text, the quality and readability of the answers were examined.

RESULTS

The average Journal of the American Medical Association score for both versions was 0, and the average DISCERN score was 61.6. A statistically significant and strong correlation was found between ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0 DISCERN scores. There was excellent agreement in DISCERN scores for both versions among the 3 evaluators. ChatGPT 3.5 was found to be less readable than ChatGPT 4.0.

CONCLUSION

The information provided by the ChatGPT conversational system was evaluated as of high quality, but there were significant shortcomings in terms of reliability due to the lack of citations. Despite the ChatGPT 4.0 version having higher readability scores, both versions were considered difficult to read.

摘要

背景

本研究的目的是评估是否可以推荐聊天生成预训练变换器(ChatGPT)作为一种资源,为计划进行肩袖修复的患者提供信息,并评估ChatGPT 3.5和4.0版本在信息内容和可读性方面的差异。

方法

2023年8月,3位肩袖手术经验丰富的外科医生使用不同的互联网协议计算机,向ChatGPT 3.5和ChatGPT 4程序提出了13个肩袖疾病患者常见的问题。将两个版本的答案转换为文本后,对答案的质量和可读性进行了检查。

结果

两个版本的平均美国医学会杂志评分均为0,平均DISCERN评分为61.6。发现ChatGPT 3.5和4.0的DISCERN评分之间存在统计学上显著且强烈的相关性。3位评估者对两个版本的DISCERN评分具有高度一致性。发现ChatGPT 3.5的可读性低于ChatGPT 4.0。

结论

ChatGPT对话系统提供的信息被评估为高质量,但由于缺乏引用,在可靠性方面存在重大缺陷。尽管ChatGPT 4.0版本的可读性得分较高,但两个版本都被认为难以阅读。

相似文献

1
Comparison of ChatGPT versions in informing patients with rotator cuff injuries.
JSES Int. 2024 May 6;8(5):1016-1018. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2024.04.016. eCollection 2024 Sep.
2
Evaluation of information from artificial intelligence on rotator cuff repair surgery.
JSES Int. 2023 Oct 21;8(1):53-57. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.09.009. eCollection 2024 Jan.
3
Can Chat-GPT assist orthopedic surgeons in evaluating the quality of rotator cuff surgery patient information videos?
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2025 Jan;34(1):141-146. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.04.021. Epub 2024 Jun 7.
6
How Efficient Is ChatGPT in Accessing Accurate and Quality Health-Related Information?
Cureus. 2023 Oct 7;15(10):e46662. doi: 10.7759/cureus.46662. eCollection 2023 Oct.
8
ChatGPT's Ability to Assess Quality and Readability of Online Medical Information: Evidence From a Cross-Sectional Study.
Cureus. 2023 Jul 20;15(7):e42214. doi: 10.7759/cureus.42214. eCollection 2023 Jul.
10
ChatGPT-4 Can Help Hand Surgeons Communicate Better With Patients.
J Hand Surg Glob Online. 2024 Apr 6;6(3):436-438. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsg.2024.03.008. eCollection 2024 May.

引用本文的文献

1
The Performance of AI in Dermatology Exams: The Exam Success and Limits of ChatGPT.
J Cosmet Dermatol. 2025 May;24(5):e70244. doi: 10.1111/jocd.70244.
2
Can popular AI large language models provide reliable answers to frequently asked questions about rotator cuff tears?
JSES Int. 2024 Nov 29;9(2):390-397. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2024.11.012. eCollection 2025 Mar.

本文引用的文献

1
Health literacy in rotator cuff repair: a quantitative assessment of the understandability of online patient education material.
JSES Int. 2023 Jul 17;7(6):2344-2348. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.016. eCollection 2023 Nov.
3
Rotator cuff repair: what questions are patients asking online and where are they getting their answers?
Clin Shoulder Elb. 2023 Mar;26(1):25-31. doi: 10.5397/cise.2022.01235. Epub 2023 Feb 23.
4
A deeper dive into ChatGPT: history, use and future perspectives for orthopaedic research.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023 Apr;31(4):1190-1192. doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07372-5. Epub 2023 Mar 9.
6
Patient education on subacromial impingement syndrome : Reliability and educational quality of content available on Google and YouTube.
Orthopadie (Heidelb). 2022 Dec;51(12):1003-1009. doi: 10.1007/s00132-022-04294-x. Epub 2022 Aug 22.
7
Online Patient Education Materials for Common Sports Injuries Are Written at Too-High of a Reading Level: A Systematic Review.
Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2022 Feb 11;4(3):e861-e875. doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2021.12.017. eCollection 2022 Jun.
8
Online Resources for Rotator Cuff Repair: What are Patients Reading?
Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2019 Aug 3;1(1):e85-e92. doi: 10.1016/j.asmr.2019.06.002. eCollection 2019 Nov.
9
The Readability of AAOS Patient Education Materials: Evaluating the Progress Since 2008.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Sep 7;98(17):e70. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.15.00658.
10
Evaluation of Internet Information About Rotator Cuff Repair.
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2016 Mar-Apr;45(3):E136-42.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验