The Potential of ChatGPT as a Source of Information for Kidney Transplant Recipients and Their Caregivers.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 PEDIATRICS
Kaan Can Demirbaş, Seha Saygılı, Esra Karabağ Yılmaz, Rüveyda Gülmez, Ayşe Ağbaş, Mehmet Taşdemir, Nur Canpolat
{"title":"The Potential of ChatGPT as a Source of Information for Kidney Transplant Recipients and Their Caregivers.","authors":"Kaan Can Demirbaş, Seha Saygılı, Esra Karabağ Yılmaz, Rüveyda Gülmez, Ayşe Ağbaş, Mehmet Taşdemir, Nur Canpolat","doi":"10.1111/petr.70068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Education and enhancing the knowledge of adolescents who will undergo kidney transplantation are among the primary objectives of their care. While there are specific interventions in place to achieve this, they require extensive resources. The rise of large language models like ChatGPT-3.5 offers potential assistance for providing information to patients. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, relevance, and safety of ChatGPT-3.5's responses to patient-centered questions about pediatric kidney transplantation. The objective was to assess whether ChatGPT-3.5 could be a supplementary educational tool for adolescents and their caregivers in a complex medical context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 37 questions about kidney transplantation were presented to ChatGPT-3.5, which was prompted to respond as a health professional would to a layperson. Five pediatric nephrologists independently evaluated the outputs for accuracy, relevance, comprehensiveness, understandability, readability, and safety.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean accuracy, relevancy, and comprehensiveness scores for all outputs were 4.51, 4.56, and 4.55, respectively. Out of 37 outputs, four were rated as completely accurate, and seven were completely relevant and comprehensive. Only one output had an accuracy, relevancy, and comprehensiveness score below 4. Twelve outputs were considered potentially risky, but only three had a risk grade of moderate or higher. Outputs that were considered risky had an accuracy and relevancy below the average.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that ChatGPT could be a useful tool for adolescents or caregivers of individuals waiting for kidney transplantation. However, the presence of potentially risky outputs underscores the necessity for human oversight and validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":20038,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Transplantation","volume":"29 3","pages":"e70068"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/petr.70068","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Education and enhancing the knowledge of adolescents who will undergo kidney transplantation are among the primary objectives of their care. While there are specific interventions in place to achieve this, they require extensive resources. The rise of large language models like ChatGPT-3.5 offers potential assistance for providing information to patients. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, relevance, and safety of ChatGPT-3.5's responses to patient-centered questions about pediatric kidney transplantation. The objective was to assess whether ChatGPT-3.5 could be a supplementary educational tool for adolescents and their caregivers in a complex medical context.

Methods: A total of 37 questions about kidney transplantation were presented to ChatGPT-3.5, which was prompted to respond as a health professional would to a layperson. Five pediatric nephrologists independently evaluated the outputs for accuracy, relevance, comprehensiveness, understandability, readability, and safety.

Results: The mean accuracy, relevancy, and comprehensiveness scores for all outputs were 4.51, 4.56, and 4.55, respectively. Out of 37 outputs, four were rated as completely accurate, and seven were completely relevant and comprehensive. Only one output had an accuracy, relevancy, and comprehensiveness score below 4. Twelve outputs were considered potentially risky, but only three had a risk grade of moderate or higher. Outputs that were considered risky had an accuracy and relevancy below the average.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that ChatGPT could be a useful tool for adolescents or caregivers of individuals waiting for kidney transplantation. However, the presence of potentially risky outputs underscores the necessity for human oversight and validation.

ChatGPT作为肾移植受者及其护理者信息来源的潜力。
背景:教育和提高青少年将接受肾移植的知识是他们护理的主要目标之一。虽然有实现这一目标的具体干预措施,但它们需要大量资源。ChatGPT-3.5等大型语言模型的兴起,为向患者提供信息提供了潜在的帮助。本研究旨在评估ChatGPT-3.5对以患者为中心的儿童肾移植问题的回答的准确性、相关性和安全性。目的是评估ChatGPT-3.5是否可以在复杂的医疗环境中作为青少年及其照顾者的辅助教育工具。方法:向ChatGPT-3.5提交37个有关肾移植的问题,并提示其回答为健康专业人员对外行人的回答。五名儿科肾病专家独立评估了结果的准确性、相关性、全面性、可理解性、可读性和安全性。结果:所有输出的平均准确性、相关性和全面性得分分别为4.51、4.56和4.55。在37项产出中,4项被评为完全准确,7项被评为完全相关和全面。只有一个输出的准确性、相关性和综合性得分低于4分。12项产出被认为有潜在风险,但只有3项的风险等级为中等或更高。被认为有风险的产出的准确性和相关性低于平均水平。结论:我们的研究结果表明ChatGPT可能是青少年或等待肾移植个体的照顾者的有用工具。然而,存在潜在风险的产出强调了人工监督和验证的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pediatric Transplantation
Pediatric Transplantation 医学-小儿科
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
15.40%
发文量
216
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The aim of Pediatric Transplantation is to publish original articles of the highest quality on clinical experience and basic research in transplantation of tissues and solid organs in infants, children and adolescents. The journal seeks to disseminate the latest information widely to all individuals involved in kidney, liver, heart, lung, intestine and stem cell (bone-marrow) transplantation. In addition, the journal publishes focused reviews on topics relevant to pediatric transplantation as well as timely editorial comment on controversial issues.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信