MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1177/14604582241304679

Медицинская библиотека · Health informatics journal · 2024

Evaluation of the reliability and readability of answers given by chatbots to frequently asked questions about endophthalmitis: A cross-sectional study on chatbots.

Demir Suleyman

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the accuracy, reliability, and readability of A-Eye Consult, ChatGPT-4.0, Google Gemini and Copilot AI large language models (LLMs) in responding to patient questions about endophthalmitis.

Methods

The LLMs' responses to 25 questions about endophthalmitis, frequently asked by patients, were evaluated by two ophthalmologists using a five-point Likert scale, with scores ranging from 1-5. The DISCERN scale assessed the reliability of the LLMs' responses, whereas the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) indices assessed readability and text complexity, respectively.

Results

A-Eye Consult and ChatGPT-4.0 outperformed Google Gemini and Copilot in providing comprehensive and precise responses. The Likert score significantly differed across all four LLMs (p < .001), with A-Eye Consult scoring significantly higher than Google Gemini and Copilot (p < .001).

Conclusions

A-Eye Consult and ChatGPT-4.0 responses, while more complex than those of other LLMs, provided more reliable and accurate information.

Для цитирования: Demir Suleyman. Evaluation of the reliability and readability of answers given by chatbots to frequently asked questions about endophthalmitis: A cross-sectional study on chatbots.. Health informatics journal. 2024. DOI: 10.1177/14604582241304679.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.