Accessing information provided via artificial intelligence regarding reverse and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

Q4 Medicine Seminars in Arthroplasty Pub Date : 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1053/j.sart.2024.09.001
Suhasini Gupta BS , Brett D. Haislup MD , Alayna K. Vaughan MD , Ryan A. Hoffman MD , Anand M. Murthi MD
{"title":"Accessing information provided via artificial intelligence regarding reverse and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty","authors":"Suhasini Gupta BS ,&nbsp;Brett D. Haislup MD ,&nbsp;Alayna K. Vaughan MD ,&nbsp;Ryan A. Hoffman MD ,&nbsp;Anand M. Murthi MD","doi":"10.1053/j.sart.2024.09.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The purpose of this study is to analyze the quality, accuracy, and readability of information provided by an artificial intelligence (AI) interface ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco). We searched ChatGPT for commonly asked questions by patients regarding anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>ChatGPT was used to answer 30 commonly asked questions by patients regarding aTSA and rTSA, inputted as “total shoulder replacement” and “reverse shoulder replacement”. These questions were categorized based on the Rothwell criteria into <em>Fact</em>, <em>Policy</em>, and <em>Value</em>. The answers generated were analyzed for quality, accuracy, and readability using the DISCERN scale, JAMA benchmark criteria, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Grade Level (FKGL).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>For both rTSA and aTSA the DISCERN score for <em>Fact</em> questions was 57, <em>Policy</em> questions was 61, and for <em>Value</em> questions was 58 (all were all considered “good”). The JAMA benchmark criteria was 0, representing the lowest score for <em>Fact</em>, <em>Policy</em>, <em>and Value</em> questions for both rTSA and aTSA questions. The FRES score for the aTSA answers for <em>Fact</em> was 15.15, for <em>Policy</em> was 11.14, and for <em>Value</em> questions was 10.95. The FRES score for rTSA questions for <em>Fact</em> is 48.02, <em>Policy</em> is 12.51, and <em>Value</em> is 17.22. The FKGL for aTSA answer for <em>Fact</em> was 17.48, <em>Policy</em> was 17.72 and <em>Value</em> was 17.96. The FKGL for rTSA questions for <em>Fact</em> are 8.10, <em>Policy</em> is 17.27, and <em>Value</em> is 16.56.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Overall, the quality of answers provided by AI open model, ChatGPT was considered “good.” The information provided had lower reliability, and lack of information regarding funding and disclosures. Most of the information generated by ChatGPT was also found to have the readability of “academic level text”, while <em>Fact</em> related information on reverse shoulder arthroplasty was found to have the readability of 9th grade level, which may be too complex for most patients. Overall, these results indicate that ChatGPT can provide correct answers to questions about aTSA and rTSA, although we would caution patients from utilizing this resource due to the lack of citations and complexity of the output that ChatGPT provides. Importantly, all answers provided by AI suggested reaching out to physicians to get more accurate and personalized advise, to factor into the shared decisions making model.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":39885,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Arthroplasty","volume":"35 1","pages":"Pages 56-61"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1045452724001007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study is to analyze the quality, accuracy, and readability of information provided by an artificial intelligence (AI) interface ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco). We searched ChatGPT for commonly asked questions by patients regarding anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA).

Methods

ChatGPT was used to answer 30 commonly asked questions by patients regarding aTSA and rTSA, inputted as “total shoulder replacement” and “reverse shoulder replacement”. These questions were categorized based on the Rothwell criteria into Fact, Policy, and Value. The answers generated were analyzed for quality, accuracy, and readability using the DISCERN scale, JAMA benchmark criteria, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Grade Level (FKGL).

Results

For both rTSA and aTSA the DISCERN score for Fact questions was 57, Policy questions was 61, and for Value questions was 58 (all were all considered “good”). The JAMA benchmark criteria was 0, representing the lowest score for Fact, Policy, and Value questions for both rTSA and aTSA questions. The FRES score for the aTSA answers for Fact was 15.15, for Policy was 11.14, and for Value questions was 10.95. The FRES score for rTSA questions for Fact is 48.02, Policy is 12.51, and Value is 17.22. The FKGL for aTSA answer for Fact was 17.48, Policy was 17.72 and Value was 17.96. The FKGL for rTSA questions for Fact are 8.10, Policy is 17.27, and Value is 16.56.

Conclusion

Overall, the quality of answers provided by AI open model, ChatGPT was considered “good.” The information provided had lower reliability, and lack of information regarding funding and disclosures. Most of the information generated by ChatGPT was also found to have the readability of “academic level text”, while Fact related information on reverse shoulder arthroplasty was found to have the readability of 9th grade level, which may be too complex for most patients. Overall, these results indicate that ChatGPT can provide correct answers to questions about aTSA and rTSA, although we would caution patients from utilizing this resource due to the lack of citations and complexity of the output that ChatGPT provides. Importantly, all answers provided by AI suggested reaching out to physicians to get more accurate and personalized advise, to factor into the shared decisions making model.
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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Seminars in Arthroplasty
Seminars in Arthroplasty Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
104
期刊介绍: Each issue of Seminars in Arthroplasty provides a comprehensive, current overview of a single topic in arthroplasty. The journal addresses orthopedic surgeons, providing authoritative reviews with emphasis on new developments relevant to their practice.
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents Editorial Board Thank you to our reviewers for 2024 Interest in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is increasing! An analysis of publication frequency and Google Trends Editorial Board
×
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