Quality of information and appropriateness of Open AI outputs for prostate cancer

被引:20
|
作者
Lombardo, Riccardo [1 ]
Gallo, Giacomo [1 ]
Stira, Jordi [1 ]
Turchi, Beatrice [1 ]
Santoro, Giuseppe [1 ]
Riolo, Sara [1 ]
Romagnoli, Matteo [1 ]
Cicione, Antonio [1 ]
Tema, Giorgia [1 ]
Pastore, Antonio [1 ]
Al Salhi, Yazan [1 ]
Fuschi, Andrea [1 ]
Franco, Giorgio [1 ]
Nacchia, Antonio [1 ]
Tubaro, Andrea [1 ]
De Nunzio, Cosimo [1 ]
机构
[1] Sapienza Univ Rome, Dept Urol, Rome, Italy
关键词
D O I
10.1038/s41391-024-00789-0
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Chat-GPT, a natural language processing (NLP) tool created by Open-AI, can potentially be used as a quick source for obtaining information related to prostate cancer. This study aims to analyze the quality and appropriateness of Chat-GPT's responses to inquiries related to prostate cancer compared to those of the European Urology Association's (EAU) 2023 prostate cancer guidelines. Overall, 195 questions were prepared according to the recommendations gathered in the prostate cancer section of the EAU 2023 Guideline. All questions were systematically presented to Chat-GPT's August 3 Version, and two expert urologists independently assessed and assigned scores ranging from 1 to 4 to each response (1: completely correct, 2: correct but inadequate, 3: a mix of correct and misleading information, and 4: completely incorrect). Sub-analysis per chapter and per grade of recommendation were performed. Overall, 195 recommendations were evaluated. Overall, 50/195 (26%) were completely correct, 51/195 (26%) correct but inadequate, 47/195 (24%) a mix of correct and misleading and 47/195 (24%) incorrect. When looking at different chapters Open AI was particularly accurate in answering questions on follow-up and QoL. Worst performance was recorded for the diagnosis and treatment chapters with respectively 19% and 30% of the answers completely incorrect. When looking at the strength of recommendation, no differences in terms of accuracy were recorded when comparing weak and strong recommendations (p > 0,05). Chat-GPT has a poor accuracy when answering questions on the PCa EAU guidelines recommendations. Future studies should assess its performance after adequate training.
引用
收藏
页码:229 / 231
页数:3
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Clinical deployment of AI for prostate cancer diagnosis
    Janowczyk, Andrew
    Leo, Patrick
    Rubin, Mark A.
    LANCET DIGITAL HEALTH, 2020, 2 (08): : E383 - E384
  • [42] To the Horizon: The Brink of an AI Revolution in Prostate Cancer?
    Norris, Joseph M.
    Raza, Asif
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2020, 133 (02): : E65 - E66
  • [43] Quality of prostate cancer screening information on the websites of nationally recognized cancer centers and health organizations
    Manole, Bogdan-Alexandru
    Wakefield, Daniel V.
    Dove, Austin P.
    Dulaney, Caleb R.
    Marcrom, Samuel R.
    Schwartz, David L.
    Farmer, Michael R.
    PRACTICAL RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2018, 8 (04) : 275 - 278
  • [45] Treatment options for localised prostate cancer: an assessment of the quality of health information on the internet
    Ong, K.
    Lawrentschuk, N.
    Bolton, D.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 109 : 17 - 17
  • [46] Quality and reliability of YouTube videos in Arabic as a source of patient information on prostate cancer
    Baqain, Laith
    Mukherji, Deborah
    Al-Shamsi, Humaid
    Abu-Gheida, Ibrahim
    Al Ibraheem, Akram
    Al Rabii, Kamal
    Farkouh, Ala'a
    Shahait, Mohammed
    ECANCERMEDICALSCIENCE, 2023, 17
  • [47] Evaluating the Quality of Online Health Information about Prostate Cancer TreatmentEditorial Commentary
    Hua, Sean T.
    Garzotto, Mark
    UROLOGY PRACTICE, 2021, 8 (03) : 365 - 365
  • [48] ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Posttreatment Follow-up of Prostate Cancer
    Casalino, David D.
    Remer, Erick M.
    Arellano, Ronald S.
    Bishoff, Jay T.
    Coursey, Courtney A.
    Dighe, Manjiri
    Eggli, Douglas F.
    Fulgham, Pat
    Israel, Gary M.
    Lazarus, Elizabeth
    Leyendecker, John R.
    Nikolaidis, Paul
    Papanicolaou, Nicholas
    Prasad, Srinivasa
    Ramchandani, Parvati
    Sheth, Sheila
    Vikram, Raghunandan
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2011, 8 (12) : 863 - 871
  • [49] ACR Appropriateness Criteria Prostate Cancer Pretreatment Detection, Surveillance, and Staging
    Coakley, Fergus V.
    Oto, Aytekin
    Alexander, Lauren F.
    Allen, Brian C.
    Davis, Brian J.
    Froemming, Adam T.
    Fulgham, Pat F.
    Hosseinzadeh, Keyanoosh
    Porter, Christopher
    Sahni, V. Anik
    Schuster, David M.
    Showalter, Timothy N.
    Venkatesan, Aradhana M.
    Verma, Sadhna
    Wang, Carolyn L.
    Remer, Erick M.
    Eberhardt, Steven C.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2017, 14 (05) : S245 - S257
  • [50] Quality of Life After Open or Robotic Prostatectomy, Cryoablation or Brachytherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer
    Malcolm, John B.
    Fabrizio, Michael D.
    Barone, Bethany B.
    Given, Robert W.
    Lance, Raymond S.
    Lynch, Donald F.
    Davis, John W.
    Shaves, Mark E.
    Schellhammer, Paul F.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2010, 183 (05): : 1822 - 1828