{"title":"读者能在医疗保健写作中发现人工智能的骗子吗?","authors":"Natalie Bourré","doi":"10.56012/fwhk6920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of artificial intelligence (AI) writing assistants in the healthcare industry is becoming increasingly prevalent. These tools can help medical writers to generate content more quickly and efficiently, but they also raise concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the information that is produced. This study investigated whether readers can distinguish between health-related texts written by humans and those generated by AI writing assistants. A survey of 164 respondents found that slightly more than half could correctly identify the source of the healthcare text. Differences between healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals were not statistically significant. Medical writers were better at recognising that a text had been written by an AI model than were non-medical writers (P<.05). These findings suggest that it is important for organisations to establish clear guidelines regarding the use of AI writing assistants in healthcare. The authors of health-related content should be required to identify whether their work has been completed by a human or an AI writer, and organisations should develop processes for evaluating the accuracy and completeness of AI-generated content. This study has several limitations, including the small sample size. However, the findings provide valuable insights into the need for organisations to develop clear guidelines for their use.","PeriodicalId":37384,"journal":{"name":"Medical Writing","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can readers spot the AI impostor in healthcare writing?\",\"authors\":\"Natalie Bourré\",\"doi\":\"10.56012/fwhk6920\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The use of artificial intelligence (AI) writing assistants in the healthcare industry is becoming increasingly prevalent. These tools can help medical writers to generate content more quickly and efficiently, but they also raise concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the information that is produced. This study investigated whether readers can distinguish between health-related texts written by humans and those generated by AI writing assistants. A survey of 164 respondents found that slightly more than half could correctly identify the source of the healthcare text. Differences between healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals were not statistically significant. Medical writers were better at recognising that a text had been written by an AI model than were non-medical writers (P<.05). These findings suggest that it is important for organisations to establish clear guidelines regarding the use of AI writing assistants in healthcare. The authors of health-related content should be required to identify whether their work has been completed by a human or an AI writer, and organisations should develop processes for evaluating the accuracy and completeness of AI-generated content. This study has several limitations, including the small sample size. However, the findings provide valuable insights into the need for organisations to develop clear guidelines for their use.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Writing\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Writing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56012/fwhk6920\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Writing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56012/fwhk6920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
Can readers spot the AI impostor in healthcare writing?
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) writing assistants in the healthcare industry is becoming increasingly prevalent. These tools can help medical writers to generate content more quickly and efficiently, but they also raise concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the information that is produced. This study investigated whether readers can distinguish between health-related texts written by humans and those generated by AI writing assistants. A survey of 164 respondents found that slightly more than half could correctly identify the source of the healthcare text. Differences between healthcare professionals and non-healthcare professionals were not statistically significant. Medical writers were better at recognising that a text had been written by an AI model than were non-medical writers (P<.05). These findings suggest that it is important for organisations to establish clear guidelines regarding the use of AI writing assistants in healthcare. The authors of health-related content should be required to identify whether their work has been completed by a human or an AI writer, and organisations should develop processes for evaluating the accuracy and completeness of AI-generated content. This study has several limitations, including the small sample size. However, the findings provide valuable insights into the need for organisations to develop clear guidelines for their use.
期刊介绍:
Medical Writing is a quarterly publication that aims to educate and inform medical writers in Europe and beyond. Each issue focuses on a specific theme, and all issues include feature articles and regular columns on topics relevant to the practice of medical writing. We welcome articles providing practical advice to medical writers; guidelines and reviews/summaries/updates of guidelines published elsewhere; original research; opinion pieces; interviews; and review articles.