生成式人工智能在回答患者有关结直肠癌手术的询问时的交流能力。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY International Journal of Colorectal Disease Pub Date : 2024-06-20 DOI:10.1007/s00384-024-04670-3
Min Hyeong Jo, Min-Jun Kim, Heung-Kwon Oh, Mi Jeong Choi, Hye-Rim Shin, Tae-Gyun Lee, Hong-Min Ahn, Duck-Woo Kim, Sung-Bum Kang
{"title":"生成式人工智能在回答患者有关结直肠癌手术的询问时的交流能力。","authors":"Min Hyeong Jo, Min-Jun Kim, Heung-Kwon Oh, Mi Jeong Choi, Hye-Rim Shin, Tae-Gyun Lee, Hong-Min Ahn, Duck-Woo Kim, Sung-Bum Kang","doi":"10.1007/s00384-024-04670-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine the ability of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) to answer patients' questions regarding colorectal cancer (CRC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten clinically relevant questions about CRC were selected from top-rated hospitals' websites and patient surveys and presented to three GAI tools (Chatbot Generative Pre-Trained Transformer [GPT-4], Google Bard, and CLOVA X). Their responses were compared with answers from the CRC information book. Response evaluation was performed by two groups, each consisting of five healthcare professionals (HCP) and patients. Each question was scored on a 1-5 Likert scale based on four evaluation criteria (maximum score, 20 points/question).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In an analysis including only HCPs, the information book scored 11.8 ± 1.2, GPT-4 scored 13.5 ± 1.1, Google Bard scored 11.5 ± 0.7, and CLOVA X scored 12.2 ± 1.4 (P = 0.001). The score of GPT-4 was significantly higher than those of the information book (P = 0.020) and Google Bard (P = 0.001). In an analysis including only patients, the information book scored 14.1 ± 1.4, GPT-4 scored 15.2 ± 1.8, Google Bard scored 15.5 ± 1.8, and CLOVA X scored 14.4 ± 1.8, without significant differences (P = 0.234). When both groups of evaluators were included, the information book scored 13.0 ± 0.9, GPT-4 scored 14.4 ± 1.2, Google Bard scored 13.5 ± 1.0, and CLOVA X scored 13.3 ± 1.5 (P = 0.070).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The three GAIs demonstrated similar or better communicative competence than the information book regarding questions related to CRC surgery in Korean. If high-quality medical information provided by GAI is supervised properly by HCPs and published as an information book, it could be helpful for patients to obtain accurate information and make informed decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":13789,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Colorectal Disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11189990/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communicative competence of generative artificial intelligence in responding to patient queries about colorectal cancer surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Min Hyeong Jo, Min-Jun Kim, Heung-Kwon Oh, Mi Jeong Choi, Hye-Rim Shin, Tae-Gyun Lee, Hong-Min Ahn, Duck-Woo Kim, Sung-Bum Kang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00384-024-04670-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine the ability of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) to answer patients' questions regarding colorectal cancer (CRC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten clinically relevant questions about CRC were selected from top-rated hospitals' websites and patient surveys and presented to three GAI tools (Chatbot Generative Pre-Trained Transformer [GPT-4], Google Bard, and CLOVA X). Their responses were compared with answers from the CRC information book. Response evaluation was performed by two groups, each consisting of five healthcare professionals (HCP) and patients. Each question was scored on a 1-5 Likert scale based on four evaluation criteria (maximum score, 20 points/question).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In an analysis including only HCPs, the information book scored 11.8 ± 1.2, GPT-4 scored 13.5 ± 1.1, Google Bard scored 11.5 ± 0.7, and CLOVA X scored 12.2 ± 1.4 (P = 0.001). The score of GPT-4 was significantly higher than those of the information book (P = 0.020) and Google Bard (P = 0.001). In an analysis including only patients, the information book scored 14.1 ± 1.4, GPT-4 scored 15.2 ± 1.8, Google Bard scored 15.5 ± 1.8, and CLOVA X scored 14.4 ± 1.8, without significant differences (P = 0.234). When both groups of evaluators were included, the information book scored 13.0 ± 0.9, GPT-4 scored 14.4 ± 1.2, Google Bard scored 13.5 ± 1.0, and CLOVA X scored 13.3 ± 1.5 (P = 0.070).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The three GAIs demonstrated similar or better communicative competence than the information book regarding questions related to CRC surgery in Korean. If high-quality medical information provided by GAI is supervised properly by HCPs and published as an information book, it could be helpful for patients to obtain accurate information and make informed decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13789,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Colorectal Disease\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11189990/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Colorectal Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-024-04670-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Colorectal Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-024-04670-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究生成式人工智能(GAI)回答患者有关结直肠癌(CRC)问题的能力:从排名靠前的医院网站和患者调查中选取了十个与 CRC 相关的临床问题,并将其提交给三个 GAI 工具(聊天机器人生成预训练转换器 [GPT-4]、谷歌巴德和 CLOVA X)。他们的回答与 CRC 信息手册中的答案进行了比较。回答评估由两组人员进行,每组由五名医疗保健专业人员(HCP)和患者组成。每个问题都根据四项评估标准以 1-5 分的李克特量表进行评分(最高分,20 分/问题):在仅包括医护人员的分析中,信息手册得分为 11.8 ± 1.2,GPT-4 得分为 13.5 ± 1.1,Google Bard 得分为 11.5 ± 0.7,CLOVA X 得分为 12.2 ± 1.4(P = 0.001)。GPT-4 的得分明显高于信息手册(P = 0.020)和 Google Bard(P = 0.001)。在仅包括患者的分析中,信息手册得分为 14.1 ± 1.4,GPT-4 得分为 15.2 ± 1.8,Google Bard 得分为 15.5 ± 1.8,CLOVA X 得分为 14.4 ± 1.8,无显著差异(P = 0.234)。如果将两组评估者都包括在内,信息手册得分 13.0 ± 0.9,GPT-4 得分 14.4 ± 1.2,Google Bard 得分 13.5 ± 1.0,CLOVA X 得分 13.3 ± 1.5(P = 0.070):结论:在用韩语回答与 CRC 手术相关的问题时,三个 GAI 所表现出的沟通能力与信息手册相似或更好。如果 GAI 提供的高质量医疗信息能得到 HCP 的适当监督,并以信息手册的形式出版,将有助于患者获得准确的信息并做出明智的决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Communicative competence of generative artificial intelligence in responding to patient queries about colorectal cancer surgery.

Purpose: To examine the ability of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) to answer patients' questions regarding colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods: Ten clinically relevant questions about CRC were selected from top-rated hospitals' websites and patient surveys and presented to three GAI tools (Chatbot Generative Pre-Trained Transformer [GPT-4], Google Bard, and CLOVA X). Their responses were compared with answers from the CRC information book. Response evaluation was performed by two groups, each consisting of five healthcare professionals (HCP) and patients. Each question was scored on a 1-5 Likert scale based on four evaluation criteria (maximum score, 20 points/question).

Results: In an analysis including only HCPs, the information book scored 11.8 ± 1.2, GPT-4 scored 13.5 ± 1.1, Google Bard scored 11.5 ± 0.7, and CLOVA X scored 12.2 ± 1.4 (P = 0.001). The score of GPT-4 was significantly higher than those of the information book (P = 0.020) and Google Bard (P = 0.001). In an analysis including only patients, the information book scored 14.1 ± 1.4, GPT-4 scored 15.2 ± 1.8, Google Bard scored 15.5 ± 1.8, and CLOVA X scored 14.4 ± 1.8, without significant differences (P = 0.234). When both groups of evaluators were included, the information book scored 13.0 ± 0.9, GPT-4 scored 14.4 ± 1.2, Google Bard scored 13.5 ± 1.0, and CLOVA X scored 13.3 ± 1.5 (P = 0.070).

Conclusion: The three GAIs demonstrated similar or better communicative competence than the information book regarding questions related to CRC surgery in Korean. If high-quality medical information provided by GAI is supervised properly by HCPs and published as an information book, it could be helpful for patients to obtain accurate information and make informed decisions.

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
4.90
自引率
3.60%
发文量
206
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Colorectal Disease, Clinical and Molecular Gastroenterology and Surgery aims to publish novel and state-of-the-art papers which deal with the physiology and pathophysiology of diseases involving the entire gastrointestinal tract. In addition to original research articles, the following categories will be included: reviews (usually commissioned but may also be submitted), case reports, letters to the editor, and protocols on clinical studies. The journal offers its readers an interdisciplinary forum for clinical science and molecular research related to gastrointestinal disease.
期刊最新文献
Risk of metachronous colorectal cancer associated with polypectomy during endoscopic diagnosis of colorectal cancer. A multi-docking strategy for robotic LAR and deep pelvic surgery with the Hugo RAS system: experience from a tertiary referral center. Does the initial treatment of primary tumor impact prognosis after recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer? Results from a retrospective cohort analysis. Effect of powered circular stapler in colorectal anastomosis after left-sided colic resection: systematic review and meta-analysis. Subcutaneous infliximab in Crohn's disease patients with previous immunogenic failure of intravenous infliximab.
×
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