ChatGPT 可以满意地回答患者关于肘关节尺侧副韧带重建的常见问题

William L. Johns M.D. , Alec Kellish M.D. , Dominic Farronato B.S. , Michael G. Ciccotti M.D. , Sommer Hammoud M.D.
{"title":"ChatGPT 可以满意地回答患者关于肘关节尺侧副韧带重建的常见问题","authors":"William L. Johns M.D. ,&nbsp;Alec Kellish M.D. ,&nbsp;Dominic Farronato B.S. ,&nbsp;Michael G. Ciccotti M.D. ,&nbsp;Sommer Hammoud M.D.","doi":"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To determine whether ChatGPT effectively responds to 10 commonly asked questions concerning ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A comprehensive list of 90 UCL reconstruction questions was initially created, with a final set of 10 “most commonly asked” questions ultimately selected. Questions were presented to ChatGPT and its response was documented. Responses were evaluated independently by 3 authors using an evidence-based methodology, resulting in a grading system categorized as follows: (1) excellent response not requiring clarification; (2) satisfactory requiring minimal clarification; (3) satisfactory requiring moderate clarification; and (4) unsatisfactory requiring substantial clarification.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Six of 10 ten responses were rated as “excellent” or “satisfactory.” Of those 6 responses, 2 were determined to be “excellent response not requiring clarification,” 3 were “satisfactory requiring minimal clarification,” and 1 was “satisfactory requiring moderate clarification.” Four questions encompassing inquiries about “What are the potential risks of UCL reconstruction surgery?” “Which type of graft should be used for my UCL reconstruction?” and “Should I have UCL reconstruction or repair?” were rated as “unsatisfactory requiring substantial clarification.”</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>ChatGPT exhibited the potential to improve a patient’s basic understanding of UCL reconstruction and provided responses that were deemed satisfactory to excellent for 60% of the most commonly asked questions. For the other 40% of questions, ChatGPT gave unsatisfactory responses, primarily due to a lack of relevant details or the need for further explanation.</p></div><div><h3>Clinical Relevance</h3><p>ChatGPT can assist in patient education regarding UCL reconstruction; however, its ability to appropriately answer more complex questions remains to be an area of skepticism and future improvement.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34631,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":"6 2","pages":"Article 100893"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000117/pdfft?md5=2050f137b07df1e314a24ed314d80097&pid=1-s2.0-S2666061X24000117-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ChatGPT Can Offer Satisfactory Responses to Common Patient Questions Regarding Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction\",\"authors\":\"William L. Johns M.D. ,&nbsp;Alec Kellish M.D. ,&nbsp;Dominic Farronato B.S. ,&nbsp;Michael G. Ciccotti M.D. ,&nbsp;Sommer Hammoud M.D.\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100893\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To determine whether ChatGPT effectively responds to 10 commonly asked questions concerning ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A comprehensive list of 90 UCL reconstruction questions was initially created, with a final set of 10 “most commonly asked” questions ultimately selected. Questions were presented to ChatGPT and its response was documented. Responses were evaluated independently by 3 authors using an evidence-based methodology, resulting in a grading system categorized as follows: (1) excellent response not requiring clarification; (2) satisfactory requiring minimal clarification; (3) satisfactory requiring moderate clarification; and (4) unsatisfactory requiring substantial clarification.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Six of 10 ten responses were rated as “excellent” or “satisfactory.” Of those 6 responses, 2 were determined to be “excellent response not requiring clarification,” 3 were “satisfactory requiring minimal clarification,” and 1 was “satisfactory requiring moderate clarification.” Four questions encompassing inquiries about “What are the potential risks of UCL reconstruction surgery?” “Which type of graft should be used for my UCL reconstruction?” and “Should I have UCL reconstruction or repair?” were rated as “unsatisfactory requiring substantial clarification.”</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>ChatGPT exhibited the potential to improve a patient’s basic understanding of UCL reconstruction and provided responses that were deemed satisfactory to excellent for 60% of the most commonly asked questions. For the other 40% of questions, ChatGPT gave unsatisfactory responses, primarily due to a lack of relevant details or the need for further explanation.</p></div><div><h3>Clinical Relevance</h3><p>ChatGPT can assist in patient education regarding UCL reconstruction; however, its ability to appropriately answer more complex questions remains to be an area of skepticism and future improvement.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34631,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"6 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 100893\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000117/pdfft?md5=2050f137b07df1e314a24ed314d80097&pid=1-s2.0-S2666061X24000117-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000117\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666061X24000117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的确定 ChatGPT 是否能有效回答有关尺侧副韧带(UCL)重建的 10 个常见问题。方法最初创建了一个包含 90 个 UCL 重建问题的综合列表,最终选出了 10 个 "最常见 "问题。将问题提交给 ChatGPT 并记录其回复。由 3 位作者采用循证方法对回复进行独立评估,最终形成一个分级系统,分类如下:(结果 10 个答复中有 6 个被评为 "优秀 "或 "满意"。在这 6 个答复中,有 2 个被确定为 "不需要澄清的优秀答复",3 个被确定为 "满意,只需要少量澄清",1 个被确定为 "满意,需要适度澄清"。四个问题包括 "UCL 重建手术的潜在风险是什么?"结论 ChatGPT 有可能提高患者对 UCL 重建的基本认识,并对 60% 的常见问题提供了满意至优秀的答复。对于其他 40% 的问题,ChatGPT 提供了不满意的回答,主要原因是缺乏相关细节或需要进一步解释。临床相关性ChatGPT 可以帮助患者了解有关 UCL 重建的知识;但是,它能否恰当地回答更复杂的问题仍然是一个值得怀疑和有待改进的领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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 Can Offer Satisfactory Responses to Common Patient Questions Regarding Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction

Purpose

To determine whether ChatGPT effectively responds to 10 commonly asked questions concerning ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction.

Methods

A comprehensive list of 90 UCL reconstruction questions was initially created, with a final set of 10 “most commonly asked” questions ultimately selected. Questions were presented to ChatGPT and its response was documented. Responses were evaluated independently by 3 authors using an evidence-based methodology, resulting in a grading system categorized as follows: (1) excellent response not requiring clarification; (2) satisfactory requiring minimal clarification; (3) satisfactory requiring moderate clarification; and (4) unsatisfactory requiring substantial clarification.

Results

Six of 10 ten responses were rated as “excellent” or “satisfactory.” Of those 6 responses, 2 were determined to be “excellent response not requiring clarification,” 3 were “satisfactory requiring minimal clarification,” and 1 was “satisfactory requiring moderate clarification.” Four questions encompassing inquiries about “What are the potential risks of UCL reconstruction surgery?” “Which type of graft should be used for my UCL reconstruction?” and “Should I have UCL reconstruction or repair?” were rated as “unsatisfactory requiring substantial clarification.”

Conclusions

ChatGPT exhibited the potential to improve a patient’s basic understanding of UCL reconstruction and provided responses that were deemed satisfactory to excellent for 60% of the most commonly asked questions. For the other 40% of questions, ChatGPT gave unsatisfactory responses, primarily due to a lack of relevant details or the need for further explanation.

Clinical Relevance

ChatGPT can assist in patient education regarding UCL reconstruction; however, its ability to appropriately answer more complex questions remains to be an area of skepticism and future improvement.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
218
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊最新文献
Continuous Meniscal Repair Technique Allows for Shorter Operative Time and Learning Curve Compared With Traditional Vertical Mattress Technique in Controlled Arthroscopic Training in Porcine Model Concomitant Popliteomeniscal Fascicles Tears Are Found in 21% of Professional Soccer Players With Acute Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries Mini-Open Technique for Gluteus Medius Tendon Repairs Is Associated With Low Complication Rates and Sustained Improvement in Patient Reported Outcomes at 2-Year Follow-Up The Top-20 Studies About Anterior Shoulder Instability From an Altmetric Analysis Had Higher Levels of Evidence Than Those From a Traditional Bibliometric Analysis Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Augmented With a Reinforced Bioinductive Implant Is Biomechanically Similar to the Native Medial Patellofemoral Ligament at Time Zero in a Cadaveric Model
×
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