评估当前有关青光眼知识的人工智能程序。

IF 0.8 4区医学 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-24 DOI:10.1055/a-2327-8484

Eyupcan Sensoy, Mehmet Citirik

{"title":"评估当前有关青光眼知识的人工智能程序。","authors":"Eyupcan Sensoy, Mehmet Citirik","doi":"10.1055/a-2327-8484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: To measure the success of three different artificial intelligence chatbots, ChatGPT, Bard, and Bing, in correctly answering questions about glaucoma types and treatment modalities and to examine their superiority over each other.Materials and methods: Thirty-two questions about glaucoma types and treatment modalities were asked using the ChatGPT, Bard, and Bing chatbots. The correct and incorrect answers were also provided. Accuracy rates were compared.Outcomes: Questions asked: ChatGPT answered 56.3%, Bard 78.1%, and Bing 59.4% correctly. There was no statistically significant difference between the three artificial intelligence chatbots in the rate of correct and incorrect answers to the questions asked (p = 0.195).Conclusion: Artificial intelligence chatbots can be used as a tool to access accurate information regarding glaucoma types and treatment modalities. However, the information obtained is not always accurate, and care should be taken when using this information.","PeriodicalId":17904,"journal":{"name":"Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde","volume":" ","pages":"1140-1144"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Current Artificial Intelligence Programs on the Knowledge of Glaucoma.\",\"authors\":\"Eyupcan Sensoy, Mehmet Citirik\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2327-8484\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: To measure the success of three different artificial intelligence chatbots, ChatGPT, Bard, and Bing, in correctly answering questions about glaucoma types and treatment modalities and to examine their superiority over each other.Materials and methods: Thirty-two questions about glaucoma types and treatment modalities were asked using the ChatGPT, Bard, and Bing chatbots. The correct and incorrect answers were also provided. Accuracy rates were compared.Outcomes: Questions asked: ChatGPT answered 56.3%, Bard 78.1%, and Bing 59.4% correctly. There was no statistically significant difference between the three artificial intelligence chatbots in the rate of correct and incorrect answers to the questions asked (p = 0.195).Conclusion: Artificial intelligence chatbots can be used as a tool to access accurate information regarding glaucoma types and treatment modalities. However, the information obtained is not always accurate, and care should be taken when using this information.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17904,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1140-1144\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2327-8484\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2327-8484","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景：测量 ChatGPT、Bard 和 Bing 这三种不同的人工智能聊天机器人在正确回答有关青光眼类型和治疗方式的问题方面的成功率，并研究它们之间的优劣：使用 ChatGPT、Bard 和 Bing 聊天机器人提出了 32 个有关青光眼类型和治疗方式的问题。同时还提供了正确答案和错误答案。比较了准确率：所提问题：ChatGPT 回答正确率为 56.3%，Bard 为 78.1%，Bing 为 59.4%。三个人工智能聊天机器人回答问题的正确率和错误率在统计学上没有明显差异（p = 0.195）：人工智能聊天机器人可用作获取有关青光眼类型和治疗方式的准确信息的工具。结论：人工智能聊天机器人可作为获取有关青光眼类型和治疗方式的准确信息的工具，但获取的信息并不总是准确的，因此在使用这些信息时应谨慎。

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

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Evaluation of Current Artificial Intelligence Programs on the Knowledge of Glaucoma.

Background: To measure the success of three different artificial intelligence chatbots, ChatGPT, Bard, and Bing, in correctly answering questions about glaucoma types and treatment modalities and to examine their superiority over each other.

Materials and methods: Thirty-two questions about glaucoma types and treatment modalities were asked using the ChatGPT, Bard, and Bing chatbots. The correct and incorrect answers were also provided. Accuracy rates were compared.

Outcomes: Questions asked: ChatGPT answered 56.3%, Bard 78.1%, and Bing 59.4% correctly. There was no statistically significant difference between the three artificial intelligence chatbots in the rate of correct and incorrect answers to the questions asked (p = 0.195).

Conclusion: Artificial intelligence chatbots can be used as a tool to access accurate information regarding glaucoma types and treatment modalities. However, the information obtained is not always accurate, and care should be taken when using this information.

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

Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde 医学-眼科学

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量

235

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： -Konzentriertes Fachwissen aus Klinik und Praxis: Die entscheidenden Ergebnisse der internationalen Forschung - für Sie auf den Punkt gebracht und kritisch kommentiert, Übersichtsarbeiten zu den maßgeblichen Themen der täglichen Praxis, Top informiert - breite klinische Berichterstattung. -CME-Punkte sammeln mit dem Refresher: Effiziente, CME-zertifizierte Fortbildung, mit dem Refresher, 3 CME-Punkte pro Ausgabe - bis zu 36 CME-Punkte im Jahr!. -Aktuelle Rubriken mit echtem Nutzwert: Kurzreferate zu den wichtigsten Artikeln internationaler Zeitschriften, Schwerpunktthema in jedem Heft: Ausführliche Übersichtsarbeiten zu den wichtigsten Themen der Ophthalmologie – so behalten Sie das gesamte Fach im Blick!, Originalien mit den neuesten Entwicklungen, Übersichten zu den relevanten Themen.