Head-to-Head Comparison of ChatGPT Versus Google Search for Medical Knowledge Acquisition

被引:41
|
作者
Ayoub, Noel F. [1 ,2 ]
Lee, Yu-Jin [1 ]
Grimm, David [1 ]
Divi, Vasu [1 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Sch Med, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Div Head & Neck Surg, Stanford, CA USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Sch Med, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Div Head & Neck Surg, 801 Welch Rd, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
artificial intelligence; ChatGPT; generative artificial intelligence; health literacy; large language models; online search engines; patient education;
D O I
10.1002/ohn.465
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
ObjectiveChat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) is the newest iteration of OpenAI's generative artificial intelligence (AI) with the potential to influence many facets of life, including health care. This study sought to assess ChatGPT's capabilities as a source of medical knowledge, using Google Search as a comparison. Study DesignCross-sectional analysis. SettingOnline using ChatGPT, Google Seach, and Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG). MethodsCPG Plain Language Summaries for 6 conditions were obtained. Questions relevant to specific conditions were developed and input into ChatGPT and Google Search. All questions were written from the patient perspective and sought (1) general medical knowledge or (2) medical recommendations, with varying levels of acuity (urgent or emergent vs routine clinical scenarios). Two blinded reviewers scored all passages and compared results from ChatGPT and Google Search, using the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool (PEMAT-P) as the primary outcome. Additional customized questions were developed that assessed the medical content of the passages. ResultsThe overall average PEMAT-P score for medical advice was 68.2% (standard deviation [SD]: 4.4) for ChatGPT and 89.4% (SD: 5.9) for Google Search (p < .001). There was a statistically significant difference in the PEMAT-P score by source (p < .001) but not by urgency of the clinical situation (p = .613). ChatGPT scored significantly higher than Google Search (87% vs 78%, p = .012) for patient education questions. ConclusionChatGPT fared better than Google Search when offering general medical knowledge, but it scored worse when providing medical recommendations. Health care providers should strive to understand the potential benefits and ramifications of generative AI to guide patients appropriately.
引用
收藏
页码:1484 / 1491
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Head-to-head comparison of 10 natriuretic peptide assays
    Collin-Chavagnac, Delphine
    Dehoux, Monique
    Schellenberg, Francois
    Cauliez, Bruno
    Maupas-Schwalm, Francoise
    Lefevre, Guillaume
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY AND LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2015, 53 (11) : 1825 - 1837
  • [32] Enoxaparin versus tinzaparin in unstable coronary syndromes. A head-to-head comparison (EVET trial)
    Papamichael, ND
    Michalis, LK
    Katsouras, CS
    Adamidis, K
    Souria, E
    Sioros, L
    Papalambrakopoulos, A
    Goudevenos, JA
    Sideris, DA
    Novas, J
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2001, 22 : 664 - 664
  • [33] Head-to-head comparison of acute and chronic pulmonary vein stenosis for cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation
    Watanabe, Ryo
    Sairaku, Akinori
    Yoshida, Yukihiko
    Nanasato, Mamoru
    Kamiya, Hiroki
    Suzuki, Hirohiko
    Ogura, Yasuhiro
    Aoyama, Yutaka
    Maeda, Mayuho
    Ando, Monami
    Eguchi, Shunsuke
    Inden, Yasuya
    Kihara, Yasuki
    Murohara, Toyoaki
    PACE-PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, 2018, 41 (04): : 376 - 382
  • [34] Solifenacin versus tolterodine— A head-to-head study: Finally! but not final?
    Staskin D.R.
    Dmochowski R.R.
    Wein A.J.
    Current Urology Reports, 2005, 6 (6) : 403 - 404
  • [35] Pasireotide Versus Octreotide in Acromegaly: A Head-to-Head Superiority Study
    Colao, A.
    Bronstein, M. D.
    Freda, P.
    Gu, F.
    Shen, C. -C.
    Gadelha, M.
    Fleseriu, M.
    van der Lely, A. J.
    Farrall, A. J.
    Resendiz, K. Hermosillo
    Ruffin, M.
    Chen, Y.
    Sheppard, M.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM, 2014, 99 (03): : 791 - 799
  • [36] ULTRASOUND VERSUS ENDOSCOPY IN ULCERATIVE COLITIS: A HEAD-TO-HEAD STUDY
    Allocca, Mariangela
    Federica, Furfaro
    Zilli, Alessandra
    D'Amico, Ferdinando
    Parigi, Tommaso Lorenzo
    Peyrin-Biroulet, Laurent
    Fiorino, Gionata
    Danese, Silvio
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2024, 166 (05) : S512 - S512
  • [37] Head-to-Head Comparison Between Phosphatidylethanol Versus Indirect Alcohol Biomarkers for Diagnosis of MetALD Versus MASLD: A Prospective Study
    Tavaglione, Federica
    Amangurbanova, Maral
    Yang, Alexander H.
    Tincopa, Monica A.
    Ajmera, Veeral
    Richards, Lisa
    Butcher, Christian
    Hernandez, Christie
    Madamba, Egbert
    Singh, Seema
    Bettencourt, Ricki
    Sirlin, Claude B.
    Loomba, Rohit
    ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2025, 61 (06) : 1043 - 1054
  • [38] CLONING OF PRIMARY HUMAN TUMORS IN CAPILLARY-TUBE VERSUS PETRI DISH - A HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
    PENG, XG
    MURPHY, MJ
    PATHOBIOLOGY, 1990, 58 (06) : 323 - 328
  • [39] Statistical Significance Versus Clinical Relevance: A Head-to-Head Comparison of the Fragility Index and Relative Risk Index
    Heston, Thomas F.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (10)
  • [40] Short Versus Long InterTAN Fixation for Geriatric Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures: A Multicentre Head-to-Head Comparison
    Sellan, Michael
    Bryant, Dianne
    Tieszer, Christina
    Papp, Steven
    Lawendy, Abdel
    Liew, Allan
    Viskontas, Darius
    MacLeod, Mark
    Coles, Chad
    Carey, Tim
    Gofton, Wade
    Trenholm, Andrew
    Stone, Trevor
    Leighton, Ross
    Sanders, David
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2019, 33 (04) : 169 - 174