Manuel Viñuela Florido, Javier Suárez Aguilar, Andrés A Maldonado, Lara Cristóbal Velasco
{"title":"与深下上腹部穿孔器皮瓣乳房重建相关的视频内容质量:社交媒体平台与大型语言模型。","authors":"Manuel Viñuela Florido, Javier Suárez Aguilar, Andrés A Maldonado, Lara Cristóbal Velasco","doi":"10.1097/SAP.0000000000004045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is currently one of the main options in breast reconstruction. The information about this surgery is critical for the patient, in order to choose the breast reconstruction method. Our study aims to analyze and compare the quality and accuracy of the information related to the DIEP flap reconstruction method provided by social media platforms (SMPs) and the new large language models (LLMs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 50 videos in English and Spanish were selected from the main SMPs (YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook) using the keywords \"DIEP flap\" and \"colgajo DIEP.\" The duration, number of likes, dislikes, number of visits, upload date, author, and the video category (institutional video, media, patient experience, academic, and surgery) were analyzed. 3 specific questions were asked to 2 new LLMs (ChatGPT and Google Bard). The quality of information in SMPs and LLMs was analyzed and compared by 2 independent board-certified plastic surgeons using the Journal of American Medical Association and DISCERN scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>LLMs showed a statistically significant higher quality of information when compared with SMPs based on the DISCERN scores. The average DISCERN scores for answers given by ChatGPT and Google Bard were 54 ± 6.841 and 61.17 ± 6.306, respectively (good quality). In SMPs, the average scores were 2.31 ± 0.67 (insufficient quality) and 32.87 ± 9.62 (low quality) for the Journal of American Medical Association and DISCERN scales respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the videos in SMPs were performed by nonmedical authors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The quality of information for breast reconstruction using DIEP flaps from LLMs was considered good and significantly better than in SMPs. The information found in SMPs was insufficient and of low quality. Academic plastic surgeons have an opportunity to provide quality content on this type of reconstruction in LLM and SMPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":8060,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of Video Content Related to Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: Social Media Platforms Versus Large Language Models.\",\"authors\":\"Manuel Viñuela Florido, Javier Suárez Aguilar, Andrés A Maldonado, Lara Cristóbal Velasco\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SAP.0000000000004045\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is currently one of the main options in breast reconstruction. The information about this surgery is critical for the patient, in order to choose the breast reconstruction method. Our study aims to analyze and compare the quality and accuracy of the information related to the DIEP flap reconstruction method provided by social media platforms (SMPs) and the new large language models (LLMs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 50 videos in English and Spanish were selected from the main SMPs (YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook) using the keywords \\\"DIEP flap\\\" and \\\"colgajo DIEP.\\\" The duration, number of likes, dislikes, number of visits, upload date, author, and the video category (institutional video, media, patient experience, academic, and surgery) were analyzed. 3 specific questions were asked to 2 new LLMs (ChatGPT and Google Bard). The quality of information in SMPs and LLMs was analyzed and compared by 2 independent board-certified plastic surgeons using the Journal of American Medical Association and DISCERN scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>LLMs showed a statistically significant higher quality of information when compared with SMPs based on the DISCERN scores. The average DISCERN scores for answers given by ChatGPT and Google Bard were 54 ± 6.841 and 61.17 ± 6.306, respectively (good quality). In SMPs, the average scores were 2.31 ± 0.67 (insufficient quality) and 32.87 ± 9.62 (low quality) for the Journal of American Medical Association and DISCERN scales respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the videos in SMPs were performed by nonmedical authors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The quality of information for breast reconstruction using DIEP flaps from LLMs was considered good and significantly better than in SMPs. The information found in SMPs was insufficient and of low quality. Academic plastic surgeons have an opportunity to provide quality content on this type of reconstruction in LLM and SMPs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Plastic Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Plastic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004045\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004045","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Quality of Video Content Related to Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: Social Media Platforms Versus Large Language Models.
Introduction: The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is currently one of the main options in breast reconstruction. The information about this surgery is critical for the patient, in order to choose the breast reconstruction method. Our study aims to analyze and compare the quality and accuracy of the information related to the DIEP flap reconstruction method provided by social media platforms (SMPs) and the new large language models (LLMs).
Materials and methods: A total of 50 videos in English and Spanish were selected from the main SMPs (YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook) using the keywords "DIEP flap" and "colgajo DIEP." The duration, number of likes, dislikes, number of visits, upload date, author, and the video category (institutional video, media, patient experience, academic, and surgery) were analyzed. 3 specific questions were asked to 2 new LLMs (ChatGPT and Google Bard). The quality of information in SMPs and LLMs was analyzed and compared by 2 independent board-certified plastic surgeons using the Journal of American Medical Association and DISCERN scales.
Results: LLMs showed a statistically significant higher quality of information when compared with SMPs based on the DISCERN scores. The average DISCERN scores for answers given by ChatGPT and Google Bard were 54 ± 6.841 and 61.17 ± 6.306, respectively (good quality). In SMPs, the average scores were 2.31 ± 0.67 (insufficient quality) and 32.87 ± 9.62 (low quality) for the Journal of American Medical Association and DISCERN scales respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the videos in SMPs were performed by nonmedical authors.
Conclusions: The quality of information for breast reconstruction using DIEP flaps from LLMs was considered good and significantly better than in SMPs. The information found in SMPs was insufficient and of low quality. Academic plastic surgeons have an opportunity to provide quality content on this type of reconstruction in LLM and SMPs.
期刊介绍:
The only independent journal devoted to general plastic and reconstructive surgery, Annals of Plastic Surgery serves as a forum for current scientific and clinical advances in the field and a sounding board for ideas and perspectives on its future. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original articles, brief communications, case reports, and notes in all areas of interest to the practicing plastic surgeon. There are also historical and current reviews, descriptions of surgical technique, and lively editorials and letters to the editor.