困惑
可读性
误传
医学
传单(植物学)
白内障手术
可靠性(半导体)
人工智能
眼科
计算机科学
语言模型
古生物学
功率(物理)
物理
计算机安全
量子力学
生物
程序设计语言
作者
Dean Thompson,David Thornton,Conor Ramsden
出处
期刊:Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery
[Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer)]
日期:2025-01-31
标识
DOI:10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001622
摘要
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate leaflets on cataract surgery produced by seven common free chatbots. Setting: Usage of conversational artificial intelligence services (chatbots) is becoming more prevalent in all aspects of life, including healthcare. Cataract surgery is the most commonly performed operation in the world, with numbers set to increase. Possible applications for chatbots include information giving and education, allowing clinicians to allocate their time more efficiently. Design: Analysis of answers given by seven chatbots (Bing AI, chatGPT 3.5, chatGPT 4o, ChatSonic, Google Bard, Perplexity and Pi) were prompted to “make a patient information leaflet on cataract surgery”. Methods: Answers were evaluated using the DISCERN instrument, Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT), presence of misinformation, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level readability score and material reliability. Results: The highest overall scored response was from ChatSonic, followed by Bing AI and then Perplexity. The lowest scoring was ChatGPT 3.5. ChatSonic achieved the highest DISCERN and PEMAT scores, and had the highest Flesch-Kincaid Grade level. The lowest DISCERN and PEMAT scores were for Pi. Only ChatGPT 3.5 included some misinformation in its response. Bing AI, ChatSonic and Perplexity included reliable references; the other chatbots provided no references. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a range of answers given by chatbots creating a cataract surgery leaflet, suggesting variation in their development and reliability. ChatGPT 3.5 scored the most poorly. However, ChatSonic indicated promise in how technology may be used to assist information giving in ophthalmology.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI