ChatGPT Can Often Respond Adequately to Common Patient Questions Regarding Femoroacetabular Impingement.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine Pub Date : 2024-12-24 DOI:10.1097/JSM.0000000000001327
Jeremy M Adelstein, Margaret A Sinkler, Lambert T Li, Luc M Fortier, Ajit M Vakharia, Michael J Salata
{"title":"ChatGPT Can Often Respond Adequately to Common Patient Questions Regarding Femoroacetabular Impingement.","authors":"Jeremy M Adelstein, Margaret A Sinkler, Lambert T Li, Luc M Fortier, Ajit M Vakharia, Michael J Salata","doi":"10.1097/JSM.0000000000001327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to analyze the ability of ChatGPT to answer frequently asked questions (FAQs) regarding FAI. We hypothesize that ChatGPT can provide accurate and thorough responses when presented with FAQs regarding FAI.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Ten FAQs regarding FAI were presented to ChatGPT 3.5 and initial responses were recorded and analyzed against evidence-based literature. Responses were rated as \"excellent response requiring no further clarification,\" \"satisfactory response requiring minimal clarification,\" \"satisfactory response requiring moderate clarification,\" or \"unsatisfactory response requiring substantial clarification.\"</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Institutional.</p><p><strong>Independent variables: </strong>Frequently asked questions regarding femoroacetabular impingement.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Accuracy and thoroughness of ChatGPT responses to FAQs. Hypothesis was formulated before data collection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most responses from ChatGPT were rated as satisfactory and required only minimal clarification. Two responses received an excellent rating and required no further clarification, while only 1 response from ChatGPT was rated unsatisfactory and required substantial clarification.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ChatGPT provided largely accurate and thorough responses to FAQs regarding FAI while appropriately reiterating the importance of always consulting a medical professional.</p>","PeriodicalId":10355,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JSM.0000000000001327","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to analyze the ability of ChatGPT to answer frequently asked questions (FAQs) regarding FAI. We hypothesize that ChatGPT can provide accurate and thorough responses when presented with FAQs regarding FAI.

Design: Ten FAQs regarding FAI were presented to ChatGPT 3.5 and initial responses were recorded and analyzed against evidence-based literature. Responses were rated as "excellent response requiring no further clarification," "satisfactory response requiring minimal clarification," "satisfactory response requiring moderate clarification," or "unsatisfactory response requiring substantial clarification."

Setting: Institutional.

Independent variables: Frequently asked questions regarding femoroacetabular impingement.

Main outcome measures: Accuracy and thoroughness of ChatGPT responses to FAQs. Hypothesis was formulated before data collection.

Results: Most responses from ChatGPT were rated as satisfactory and required only minimal clarification. Two responses received an excellent rating and required no further clarification, while only 1 response from ChatGPT was rated unsatisfactory and required substantial clarification.

Conclusions: ChatGPT provided largely accurate and thorough responses to FAQs regarding FAI while appropriately reiterating the importance of always consulting a medical professional.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
ChatGPT通常可以充分回应关于股髋臼撞击的常见患者问题。
目的:本研究旨在分析ChatGPT对FAI常见问题(FAQs)的回答能力。我们假设ChatGPT在提供FAI的常见问题解答时可以提供准确而全面的响应。设计:向ChatGPT 3.5提交了关于FAI的10个常见问题,并记录了初步回答,并根据循证文献进行了分析。回答被评为“优秀的回答不需要进一步的澄清”,“满意的回答需要最少的澄清”,“满意的回答需要适度的澄清”,或“不满意的回答需要大量的澄清”。设置:机构。自变量:关于股髋臼撞击的常见问题。主要结果测量:ChatGPT对常见问题的回答的准确性和彻彻性。假设是在数据收集之前制定的。结果:ChatGPT的大多数回复被评为满意,只需要很少的澄清。两个回复获得了优秀的评级,不需要进一步的澄清,而ChatGPT只有一个回复被评为不满意,需要进行实质性的澄清。结论:ChatGPT对FAI的常见问题提供了非常准确和全面的回答,同时适当地重申了始终咨询医疗专业人员的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
185
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine is an international refereed journal published for clinicians with a primary interest in sports medicine practice. The journal publishes original research and reviews covering diagnostics, therapeutics, and rehabilitation in healthy and physically challenged individuals of all ages and levels of sport and exercise participation.
期刊最新文献
Epidemiology of Golf-Related Injuries: A 10-Year Analysis of the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System Database and the Impact of Alcohol Consumption. Moving More: Physical Activity and Its Positive Effects on Depression and Anxiety in Children and Young People. Effect of Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction Training and High-Load Resistance Training on Quadriceps Strength, Dynamic Stability, and Functional Performance. Head Contact and Suspected Concussion Rates in University Basketball: Are Head Contact Penalties a Target for Prevention? Is Decreased Hip Flexibility a Risk Factor of Arm Injuries in Young Baseball Players? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1