Assessing the Informational Value of Large Language Models Responses in Aesthetic Surgery: A Comparative Analysis with Expert Opinions

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-18 DOI:10.1007/s00266-024-04613-x
Francesca Romana Grippaudo, Matteo Jeri, Michele Pezzella, Mariagiulia Orlando, Diego Ribuffo
{"title":"Assessing the Informational Value of Large Language Models Responses in Aesthetic Surgery: A Comparative Analysis with Expert Opinions","authors":"Francesca Romana Grippaudo,&nbsp;Matteo Jeri,&nbsp;Michele Pezzella,&nbsp;Mariagiulia Orlando,&nbsp;Diego Ribuffo","doi":"10.1007/s00266-024-04613-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The increasing popularity of Large Language Models (LLMs) in various healthcare settings has raised questions about their ability to provide accurate and reliable information. This study aimed to evaluate the informational value of Large Language Models responses in aesthetic plastic surgery by comparing them with the opinions of experienced surgeons.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Thirty patients undergoing three common aesthetic procedures—dermal fillers, botulinum toxin injections, and aesthetic blepharoplasty—were selected. The most frequently asked questions by these patients were recorded and submitted to ChatGpt 3.5 and Google Bard v.1.53. The answers provided by the Large Language Models were then evaluated by 13 experienced aesthetic plastic surgeons on a Likert scale for accessibility, accuracy, and overall usefulness.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>The overall ratings of the chatbot responses were moderate, with surgeons generally finding them to be accurate and clear. However, the lack of transparency regarding the sources of the information provided by the LLMs made it impossible to fully evaluate their credibility.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>While chatbots have the potential to provide patients with convenient access to information about aesthetic plastic surgery, their current limitations in terms of transparency and comprehensiveness warrant caution in their use as a primary source of information. Further research is needed to develop more robust and reliable LLMs for healthcare applications.</p><h3>Level of Evidence I</h3><p>This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7609,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","volume":"49 13","pages":"3538 - 3544"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12310761/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00266-024-04613-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The increasing popularity of Large Language Models (LLMs) in various healthcare settings has raised questions about their ability to provide accurate and reliable information. This study aimed to evaluate the informational value of Large Language Models responses in aesthetic plastic surgery by comparing them with the opinions of experienced surgeons.

Methods

Thirty patients undergoing three common aesthetic procedures—dermal fillers, botulinum toxin injections, and aesthetic blepharoplasty—were selected. The most frequently asked questions by these patients were recorded and submitted to ChatGpt 3.5 and Google Bard v.1.53. The answers provided by the Large Language Models were then evaluated by 13 experienced aesthetic plastic surgeons on a Likert scale for accessibility, accuracy, and overall usefulness.

Results

The overall ratings of the chatbot responses were moderate, with surgeons generally finding them to be accurate and clear. However, the lack of transparency regarding the sources of the information provided by the LLMs made it impossible to fully evaluate their credibility.

Conclusions

While chatbots have the potential to provide patients with convenient access to information about aesthetic plastic surgery, their current limitations in terms of transparency and comprehensiveness warrant caution in their use as a primary source of information. Further research is needed to develop more robust and reliable LLMs for healthcare applications.

Level of Evidence I

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
评估大语言模型在美容手术中的信息价值:与专家意见的比较分析。
背景:大型语言模型(llm)在各种医疗保健环境中的日益普及,引发了人们对其提供准确可靠信息能力的质疑。本研究旨在通过与经验丰富的外科医生的意见进行比较,评估大语言模型在美容整形手术中的信息价值。方法:选取30例采用皮肤填充术、肉毒杆菌毒素注射术和美容眼睑成形术的患者。记录这些患者最常问的问题并提交到ChatGpt 3.5和谷歌Bard v.1.53。由大型语言模型提供的答案随后由13名经验丰富的美容整形外科医生在李克特量表上对可及性、准确性和总体有用性进行评估。结果:聊天机器人反应的总体评分是中等的,外科医生普遍认为它们是准确和清晰的。然而,法学硕士提供的信息来源缺乏透明度,因此无法充分评估其可信度。结论:虽然聊天机器人有可能为患者提供方便的美容整形手术信息,但它们目前在透明度和全面性方面的局限性使其在作为主要信息来源时要谨慎使用。为医疗保健应用程序开发更健壮和可靠的llm需要进一步的研究。证据等级i:本刊要求作者为每篇文章指定证据等级。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述,请参阅目录或在线作者说明www.springer.com/00266。
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
4.40
自引率
25.00%
发文量
479
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is a publication of the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and the official journal of the European Association of Societies of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (EASAPS), Società Italiana di Chirurgia Plastica Ricostruttiva ed Estetica (SICPRE), Vereinigung der Deutschen Aesthetisch Plastischen Chirurgen (VDAPC), the Romanian Aesthetic Surgery Society (RASS), Asociación Española de Cirugía Estética Plástica (AECEP), La Sociedad Argentina de Cirugía Plástica, Estética y Reparadora (SACPER), the Rhinoplasty Society of Europe (RSE), the Iranian Society of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgeons (ISPAS), the Singapore Association of Plastic Surgeons (SAPS), the Australasian Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS), the Egyptian Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (ESPRS), and the Sociedad Chilena de Cirugía Plástica, Reconstructiva y Estética (SCCP). Aesthetic Plastic Surgery provides a forum for original articles advancing the art of aesthetic plastic surgery. Many describe surgical craftsmanship; others deal with complications in surgical procedures and methods by which to treat or avoid them. Coverage includes "second thoughts" on established techniques, which might be abandoned, modified, or improved. Also included are case histories; improvements in surgical instruments, pharmaceuticals, and operating room equipment; and discussions of problems such as the role of psychosocial factors in the doctor-patient and the patient-public interrelationships. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is covered in Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, SciSearch, Research Alert, Index Medicus-Medline, and Excerpta Medica/Embase.
期刊最新文献
The Efficacy Study of Facial Biomechanical A-Type Botox Injection in Reshaping the Jawline. The Outcome of the Reconstructive Procedure Using Buccal Pad of Fat Flap and Deep Plane Facelift after Permanent Filler Removal. Rethinking Skin Preparation: Is Hypochlorous Acid (Clinisept+) a Safe Alternative Skin Preparation in Aesthetic Surgery? ADM-Assisted Breast Reconstruction vs Micro-Polyurethane Foam-Covered Implants in the Prepectoral Space: A Monocentric Study. Medial Limited Midface-Lift-16-Year Experience.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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