{"title":"Assessing chatbots ability to produce leaflets on cataract surgery: Bing AI, chatGPT 3.5, chatGPT 4o, ChatSonic, Google Bard, Perplexity, and Pi.","authors":"Polly Thompson, Richard Thornton, Conor M Ramsden","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate leaflets on cataract surgery produced by 7 common free chatbots.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>UK-based ophthalmologists carrying out online research.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Data were collected from the responses of 7 freely available online chatbots.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Analysis of answers given by 7 chatbots (Bing AI, chatGPT 3.5, chatGPT 4o, ChatSonic, Google Bard, Perplexity, and Pi) was prompted to \"make a patient information leaflet on cataract surgery.\" 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"371-375"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001622","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate leaflets on cataract surgery produced by 7 common free chatbots.
Setting: UK-based ophthalmologists carrying out online research.
Design: Data were collected from the responses of 7 freely available online chatbots.
Methods: Analysis of answers given by 7 chatbots (Bing AI, chatGPT 3.5, chatGPT 4o, ChatSonic, Google Bard, Perplexity, and Pi) was prompted to "make a patient information leaflet on cataract surgery." 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.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS).
JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
