Modern Machiavelli? The Illusion of ChatGPT-Generated Patient Reviews in Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery Based on 9,000 Review Classifications

鼻整形术 系统回顾 医学 心理学 人工智能 外科 梅德林 计算机科学 政治学 法学 鼻子
作者
Samuel Knoedler,Giuseppe Sofo,Barbara Kern,Konstantin Frank,Sebastian Cotofana,Sarah von Isenburg,Sören Könneker,Francesco Mazzarone,Amir H. Dorafshar,Leonard Knoedler,Michael Alfertshofer
出处
期刊:Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery [Elsevier]
卷期号:88: 99-108
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.bjps.2023.10.119
摘要

Online patient reviews are crucial in guiding individuals who seek plastic surgery, but artificial chatbots pose a threat of disseminating fake reviews. This study aimed to compare real patient feedback with ChatGPT-generated reviews for the top five US plastic surgery procedures.Thirty real patient reviews on rhinoplasty, blepharoplasty, facelift, liposuction, and breast augmentation were collected from RealSelf and used as templates for ChatGPT to generate matching patient reviews. Prolific users (n = 30) assessed 150 pairs of reviews to identify human-written and artificial intelligence (AI)-generated reviews. Patient reviews were further assessed using AI content detector software (Copyleaks AI).Among the 9000 classification tasks, 64.3% and 35.7% of reviews were classified as authentic and fake, respectively. On an average, the author (human versus machine) was correctly identified in 59.6% of cases, and this poor classification performance was consistent across all procedures. Patients with prior aesthetic treatment showed poorer classification performance than those without (p < 0.05). The mean character count in human-written reviews was significantly higher (p < 0.001) that that in AI-generated reviews, with a significant correlation between character count and participants' accuracy rate (p < 0.001). Emotional timbre of reviews differed significantly with "happiness" being more prevalent in human-written reviews (p < 0.001), and "disappointment" being more prevalent in AI reviews (p = 0.005). Copyleaks AI correctly classified 96.7% and 69.3% of human-written and ChatGPT-generated reviews, respectively.ChatGPT convincingly replicates authentic patient reviews, even deceiving commercial AI detection software. Analyzing emotional tone and review length can help differentiate real from fake reviews, underscoring the need to educate both patients and physicians to prevent misinformation and mistrust.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
大幅提高文件上传限制,最高150M (2024-4-1)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
Akim应助洋芋兔坨采纳,获得10
1秒前
1秒前
niu完成签到 ,获得积分10
1秒前
wyx发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
现代火车发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
上进生完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
小小想想发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
2秒前
心理学狗都不学完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
ye完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
buhuola发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
armstrong发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
song发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
科研通AI2S应助寻找采纳,获得10
6秒前
6秒前
yll给yll的求助进行了留言
7秒前
小吴发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
就在海里完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
8秒前
8秒前
8秒前
小新发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
9秒前
10秒前
wsc发布了新的文献求助20
11秒前
小杨完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
dvd发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
winndsd2发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
armstrong完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
13秒前
啾啾发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
白白发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
干秋白发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
15秒前
linjiebro完成签到,获得积分10
15秒前
醉熏的天薇完成签到,获得积分10
15秒前
susu应助曼冬采纳,获得10
16秒前
18822596238完成签到,获得积分20
16秒前
Akim应助yolo采纳,获得10
17秒前
高分求助中
Sustainability in Tides Chemistry 2000
System in Systemic Functional Linguistics A System-based Theory of Language 1000
The Data Economy: Tools and Applications 1000
Bayesian Models of Cognition:Reverse Engineering the Mind 800
Essentials of thematic analysis 700
Mantiden - Faszinierende Lauerjäger – Buch gebraucht kaufen 600
PraxisRatgeber Mantiden., faszinierende Lauerjäger. – Buch gebraucht kaufe 600
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 生物 材料科学 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 基因 遗传学 催化作用 物理化学 免疫学 量子力学 细胞生物学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3118763
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 2768996
关于积分的说明 7699512
捐赠科研通 2424366
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1287781
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 620629
版权声明 599962