Karen Muñoz, Tess C Hurd, Danielle Glista, Adam Gavarkovs, John J Whicker, Kylie Hollingsworth, Alan Baker, Meg Singletary, Julia Wind, Sharad Jones, Michael P Twohig
{"title":"Parent Questions About Childhood Hearing Loss: An Evaluation of ChatGPT Response Accuracy, Completeness, and Repeatability.","authors":"Karen Muñoz, Tess C Hurd, Danielle Glista, Adam Gavarkovs, John J Whicker, Kylie Hollingsworth, Alan Baker, Meg Singletary, Julia Wind, Sharad Jones, Michael P Twohig","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to assess the responses to parent questions about childhood hearing loss that were generated by two generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, ChatGPT-4o mini and ChatGPT Professional (Pro).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Sixty-four questions grouped into three categories (hearing loss, hearing aids, and family) were queried in both platforms and rated for accuracy, completeness, readability, and repeatability. Paired-samples <i>t</i> tests were calculated to determine differences in responses between platforms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ChatGPT Pro was judged as more accurate for hearing aids and more complete for questions related to hearing loss and hearing aids compared to ChatGPT-4o mini, and ChatGPT-4o mini responses were judged as more complete compared to ChatGPT Pro for questions related to family (e.g., emotions, talking to others). Readability scores revealed that responses were generally written in a complex manner.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Responses generated on both platforms were generally judged as accurate and complete, suggesting that AI could contribute to supporting parent education needs. Further research is needed to explore strategies for improving the accuracy and completeness of AI-generated responses, including the collection of supplemental information from parent users to guide and/or prompt responses.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00081","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: We aimed to assess the responses to parent questions about childhood hearing loss that were generated by two generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, ChatGPT-4o mini and ChatGPT Professional (Pro).
Method: Sixty-four questions grouped into three categories (hearing loss, hearing aids, and family) were queried in both platforms and rated for accuracy, completeness, readability, and repeatability. Paired-samples t tests were calculated to determine differences in responses between platforms.
Results: ChatGPT Pro was judged as more accurate for hearing aids and more complete for questions related to hearing loss and hearing aids compared to ChatGPT-4o mini, and ChatGPT-4o mini responses were judged as more complete compared to ChatGPT Pro for questions related to family (e.g., emotions, talking to others). Readability scores revealed that responses were generally written in a complex manner.
Conclusions: Responses generated on both platforms were generally judged as accurate and complete, suggesting that AI could contribute to supporting parent education needs. Further research is needed to explore strategies for improving the accuracy and completeness of AI-generated responses, including the collection of supplemental information from parent users to guide and/or prompt responses.
期刊介绍：
Mission: AJA publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to clinical audiology methods and issues, and serves as an outlet for discussion of related professional and educational issues and ideas. The journal is an international outlet for research on clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, management and outcomes of hearing and balance disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. The clinical orientation of the journal allows for the publication of reports on audiology as implemented nationally and internationally, including novel clinical procedures, approaches, and cases. AJA seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work.
Scope: The broad field of clinical audiology, including audiologic/aural rehabilitation; balance and balance disorders; cultural and linguistic diversity; detection, diagnosis, prevention, habilitation, rehabilitation, and monitoring of hearing loss; hearing aids, cochlear implants, and hearing-assistive technology; hearing disorders; lifespan perspectives on auditory function; speech perception; and tinnitus.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
