Performance of ChatGPT-4 and Bard chatbots in responding to common patient questions on prostate cancer 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy
Many patients use artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots as a rapid source of health information. This raises important questions about the reliability and effectiveness of AI chatbots in delivering accurate and understandable information.BackgroundMany patients use artificial intelligence (AI) chatb...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Frontiers in oncology 2024-07, Vol.14, p.1386718 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Many patients use artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots as a rapid source of health information. This raises important questions about the reliability and effectiveness of AI chatbots in delivering accurate and understandable information.BackgroundMany patients use artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots as a rapid source of health information. This raises important questions about the reliability and effectiveness of AI chatbots in delivering accurate and understandable information.To evaluate and compare the accuracy, conciseness, and readability of responses from OpenAI ChatGPT-4 and Google Bard to patient inquiries concerning the novel 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy for prostate cancer.PurposeTo evaluate and compare the accuracy, conciseness, and readability of responses from OpenAI ChatGPT-4 and Google Bard to patient inquiries concerning the novel 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy for prostate cancer.Two experts listed the 12 most commonly asked questions by patients on 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy. These twelve questions were prompted to OpenAI ChatGPT-4 and Google Bard. AI-generated responses were distributed using an online survey platform (Qualtrics) and blindly rated by eight experts. The performances of the AI chatbots were evaluated and compared across three domains: accuracy, conciseness, and readability. Additionally, potential safety concerns associated with AI-generated answers were also examined. The Mann-Whitney U and chi-square tests were utilized to compare the performances of AI chatbots.Materials and methodsTwo experts listed the 12 most commonly asked questions by patients on 177Lu-PSMA-617 therapy. These twelve questions were prompted to OpenAI ChatGPT-4 and Google Bard. AI-generated responses were distributed using an online survey platform (Qualtrics) and blindly rated by eight experts. The performances of the AI chatbots were evaluated and compared across three domains: accuracy, conciseness, and readability. Additionally, potential safety concerns associated with AI-generated answers were also examined. The Mann-Whitney U and chi-square tests were utilized to compare the performances of AI chatbots.Eight experts participated in the survey, evaluating 12 AI-generated responses across the three domains of accuracy, conciseness, and readability, resulting in 96 assessments (12 responses x 8 experts) for each domain per chatbot. ChatGPT-4 provided more accurate answers than Bard (2.95 ± 0.671 vs 2.73 ± 0.732, p=0.027). Bard's responses had better readability |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2234-943X 2234-943X |
DOI: | 10.3389/fonc.2024.1386718 |