人工智能聊天机器人能否准确回答患者有关输精管结扎术的问题?

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY International Journal of Impotence Research Pub Date : 2024-08-24 DOI:10.1038/s41443-024-00970-y
Edwin Mouhawasse, Christopher W Haff, Preet Kumar, Benjamin Lack, Kevin Chu, Utsav Bansal, Justin M Dubin
{"title":"人工智能聊天机器人能否准确回答患者有关输精管结扎术的问题?","authors":"Edwin Mouhawasse, Christopher W Haff, Preet Kumar, Benjamin Lack, Kevin Chu, Utsav Bansal, Justin M Dubin","doi":"10.1038/s41443-024-00970-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the healthcare industry. There have been limited studies assessing AI model efficacy and accuracy in urology. To our knowledge, there is a lack in research looking at one of the most common urological procedures: the vasectomy. Ten frequently asked questions regarding vasectomies were individually entered into three different AI sources (ChatGPT, Bard & Bing) using free interfaces available to consumers. The responses were critically analyzed by three urologists and graded on a scale of 1 to 4 for clarity, accuracy, and evidence-based information, with 1 being the best and 4 being the worst. ChatGPT had the best average rating per question at 1.367, followed by Bard at 2.167 and Bing at 1.800(p = 0.000083). ChatGPT was found to provide significantly more satisfactory answers than both Bard (p = 0.00005) and Bing (p = 0.03988). The difference between Bard and Bing however was found to be insignificant (p = 0.09651). Overall, our study shows that AI Chatbots may provide mostly accurate information on frequently asked questions regarding vasectomies and is a reasonable resource for patients interested in the procedure to use. ChatGPT is the most accurate and concise of the chatbots assessed.</p>","PeriodicalId":14068,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Impotence Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can AI chatbots accurately answer patient questions regarding vasectomies?\",\"authors\":\"Edwin Mouhawasse, Christopher W Haff, Preet Kumar, Benjamin Lack, Kevin Chu, Utsav Bansal, Justin M Dubin\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41443-024-00970-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the healthcare industry. There have been limited studies assessing AI model efficacy and accuracy in urology. To our knowledge, there is a lack in research looking at one of the most common urological procedures: the vasectomy. Ten frequently asked questions regarding vasectomies were individually entered into three different AI sources (ChatGPT, Bard & Bing) using free interfaces available to consumers. The responses were critically analyzed by three urologists and graded on a scale of 1 to 4 for clarity, accuracy, and evidence-based information, with 1 being the best and 4 being the worst. ChatGPT had the best average rating per question at 1.367, followed by Bard at 2.167 and Bing at 1.800(p = 0.000083). ChatGPT was found to provide significantly more satisfactory answers than both Bard (p = 0.00005) and Bing (p = 0.03988). The difference between Bard and Bing however was found to be insignificant (p = 0.09651). Overall, our study shows that AI Chatbots may provide mostly accurate information on frequently asked questions regarding vasectomies and is a reasonable resource for patients interested in the procedure to use. ChatGPT is the most accurate and concise of the chatbots assessed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14068,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Impotence Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Impotence Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00970-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Impotence Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00970-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人工智能(AI)给医疗行业带来了革命性的变化。对人工智能模型在泌尿外科领域的有效性和准确性进行评估的研究十分有限。据我们所知,对于最常见的泌尿外科手术之一:输精管结扎术的研究还很缺乏。我们使用向消费者提供的免费界面,将有关输精管切除术的十个常见问题分别输入三个不同的人工智能源(ChatGPT、Bard 和 Bing)。三位泌尿科专家对这些回答进行了认真分析,并根据清晰度、准确性和循证信息以 1 到 4 分打分,1 分最好,4 分最差。ChatGPT 每个问题的平均评分最好,为 1.367,其次是 Bard 的 2.167 和 Bing 的 1.800(p = 0.000083)。结果发现,ChatGPT 提供的答案明显比 Bard(p = 0.00005)和 Bing(p = 0.03988)更令人满意。但 Bard 和 Bing 之间的差异并不显著(p = 0.09651)。总之,我们的研究表明,人工智能聊天机器人可以就输精管结扎方面的常见问题提供基本准确的信息,是对该手术感兴趣的患者可以使用的合理资源。在接受评估的聊天机器人中,ChatGPT 是最准确、最简洁的。
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
Can AI chatbots accurately answer patient questions regarding vasectomies?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the healthcare industry. There have been limited studies assessing AI model efficacy and accuracy in urology. To our knowledge, there is a lack in research looking at one of the most common urological procedures: the vasectomy. Ten frequently asked questions regarding vasectomies were individually entered into three different AI sources (ChatGPT, Bard & Bing) using free interfaces available to consumers. The responses were critically analyzed by three urologists and graded on a scale of 1 to 4 for clarity, accuracy, and evidence-based information, with 1 being the best and 4 being the worst. ChatGPT had the best average rating per question at 1.367, followed by Bard at 2.167 and Bing at 1.800(p = 0.000083). ChatGPT was found to provide significantly more satisfactory answers than both Bard (p = 0.00005) and Bing (p = 0.03988). The difference between Bard and Bing however was found to be insignificant (p = 0.09651). Overall, our study shows that AI Chatbots may provide mostly accurate information on frequently asked questions regarding vasectomies and is a reasonable resource for patients interested in the procedure to use. ChatGPT is the most accurate and concise of the chatbots assessed.

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
International Journal of Impotence Research
International Journal of Impotence Research 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
19.20%
发文量
140
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Impotence Research: The Journal of Sexual Medicine addresses sexual medicine for both genders as an interdisciplinary field. This includes basic science researchers, urologists, endocrinologists, cardiologists, family practitioners, gynecologists, internists, neurologists, psychiatrists, psychologists, radiologists and other health care clinicians.
期刊最新文献
Melatonin and erectile dysfunction: addressing research gaps and proposing future investigations. Sympathetic hypoactivity leads to hypocontractility of the corpus cavernosum in sickle cell mice: a mechanism contributing to priapism. Priapism in the paediatric and adolescent population. Inflatable penile prosthesis implantation in the outpatient setting is safe and feasible: a prospective, singe center study. Patients' perceptions of nocturnal erectile function assessment with the RigiScan®.
×
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