Scholay

学术搜索 · AI 审稿 · LaTeX 协作

Artificial intelligence chatbots as sources of patient education material for cataract surgery: ChatGPT-4 versus Google Bard

作者:Matthew Azzopardi, Benjamin Ng, Abison Logeswaran, Constantinos Loizou, Ryan Chin Taw Cheong, Prasanth Gireesh, Darren Shu Jeng Ting, Yu Jeat Chong · 发表于:BMJ Open Ophthalmology · 年份:2024 · DOI:10.1136/bmjophth-2024-001824 · 被引用次数:33 · 研究领域:Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education、Machine Learning in Healthcare、Electronic Health Records Systems

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a head-to-head comparative analysis of cataract surgery patient education material generated by Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT-4) and Google Bard. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 98 frequently asked questions on cataract surgery in English were taken in November 2023 from 5 trustworthy online patient information resources. 59 of these were curated (20 augmented for clarity and 39 duplicates excluded) and categorised into 3 domains: condition (n=15), preparation for surgery (n=21) and recovery after surgery (n=23). They were formulated into input prompts with 'prompt engineering'. Using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool-Printable (PEMAT-P) Auto-Scoring Form, four ophthalmologists independently graded ChatGPT-4 and Google Bard responses. The readability of responses was evaluated using a Flesch-Kincaid calculator. Responses were also subjectively examined for any inaccurate or harmful information. RESULTS: Google Bard had a higher mean overall Flesch-Kincaid Level (8.02) compared with ChatGPT-4 (5.75) (p<0.001), also noted across all three domains. ChatGPT-4 had a higher overall PEMAT-P understandability score (85.8%) in comparison to Google Bard (80.9%) (p<0.001), which was also noted in the 'preparation for cataract surgery' (85.2% vs 75.7%; p<0.001) and 'recovery after cataract surgery' (86.5% vs 82.3%; p=0.004) domains. There was no statistically significant difference in overall (42.5% vs 44.2%; p=0.344) or individual domain acti...