美容外科风险预测的未来展望:人工智能可靠吗?

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Alpay Duran, Oguz Cortuk, Bora Ok
{"title":"美容外科风险预测的未来展望:人工智能可靠吗?","authors":"Alpay Duran, Oguz Cortuk, Bora Ok","doi":"10.1093/asj/sjae140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques are showing significant potential in the medical field. The rapid advancement in artificial intelligence methods suggests their soon-to-be essential role in physicians' practices.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this study, we sought to assess and compare the readability, clarity, and precision of medical knowledge responses provided by 3 large language models (LLMs) and informed consent forms for 14 common aesthetic surgical procedures, as prepared by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The efficacy, readability, and accuracy of 3 leading LLMs, ChatGPT-4 (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA), Gemini (Google, Mountain View, CA), and Copilot (Microsoft, Redmond, WA), was systematically evaluated with 14 different prompts related to the risks of 14 common aesthetic procedures. Alongside these LLM responses, risk sections from the informed consent forms for these procedures, provided by the ASPS, were also reviewed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The risk factor segments of the combined general and specific operation consent forms were rated highest for medical knowledge accuracy (P < .05). Regarding readability and clarity, the procedure-specific informed consent forms, including LLMs, scored highest scores (P < .05). However, these same forms received the lowest score for medical knowledge accuracy (P < .05). Interestingly, surgeons preferred patient-facing materials created by ChatGPT-4, citing superior accuracy and medical information compared to other AI tools.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Physicians prefer patient-facing materials created by ChatGPT-4 over other AI tools due to their precise and comprehensive medical knowledge. Importantly, adherence to the strong recommendation of ASPS for signing both the procedure-specific and the general informed consent forms can avoid potential future complications and ethical concerns, thereby ensuring patients receive adequate information.</p>","PeriodicalId":7728,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","volume":" ","pages":"NP839-NP849"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Future Perspective of Risk Prediction in Aesthetic Surgery: Is Artificial Intelligence Reliable?\",\"authors\":\"Alpay Duran, Oguz Cortuk, Bora Ok\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/asj/sjae140\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques are showing significant potential in the medical field. The rapid advancement in artificial intelligence methods suggests their soon-to-be essential role in physicians' practices.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this study, we sought to assess and compare the readability, clarity, and precision of medical knowledge responses provided by 3 large language models (LLMs) and informed consent forms for 14 common aesthetic surgical procedures, as prepared by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The efficacy, readability, and accuracy of 3 leading LLMs, ChatGPT-4 (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA), Gemini (Google, Mountain View, CA), and Copilot (Microsoft, Redmond, WA), was systematically evaluated with 14 different prompts related to the risks of 14 common aesthetic procedures. Alongside these LLM responses, risk sections from the informed consent forms for these procedures, provided by the ASPS, were also reviewed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The risk factor segments of the combined general and specific operation consent forms were rated highest for medical knowledge accuracy (P < .05). Regarding readability and clarity, the procedure-specific informed consent forms, including LLMs, scored highest scores (P < .05). However, these same forms received the lowest score for medical knowledge accuracy (P < .05). Interestingly, surgeons preferred patient-facing materials created by ChatGPT-4, citing superior accuracy and medical information compared to other AI tools.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Physicians prefer patient-facing materials created by ChatGPT-4 over other AI tools due to their precise and comprehensive medical knowledge. Importantly, adherence to the strong recommendation of ASPS for signing both the procedure-specific and the general informed consent forms can avoid potential future complications and ethical concerns, thereby ensuring patients receive adequate information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aesthetic Surgery Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"NP839-NP849\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aesthetic Surgery Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjae140\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjae140","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人工智能(AI)技术在医疗领域显示出巨大的潜力。人工智能方法的快速发展表明,它们即将在医生的实践中发挥重要作用:本研究旨在评估和比较三种大型语言模型(LLMs)提供的医学知识回答的可读性、清晰度和准确性,以及美国整形外科医师协会(ASPS)为 14 种常见美容外科手术准备的知情同意书:方法:使用与 14 种常见美容手术风险相关的 14 种不同提示,对 ChatGPT-4(加利福尼亚州旧金山)、Gemini(谷歌,加利福尼亚州山景城)和 Copilot(微软公司,华盛顿州雷德蒙德)这三种主要 LLM 的功效、可读性和准确性进行了系统评估。除了这些 LLM 答复外,还审查了由 ASPS 提供的这些手术知情同意书中的风险部分:结果:综合一般和特殊手术同意书中的风险因素部分在医学知识准确性方面被评为最高。(结论:与其他人工智能工具相比,医生们更喜欢由 Chat GPT-4 创建的面向患者的材料,因为它们具有准确而全面的医学知识。重要的是,遵照 ASPS 的强烈建议签署特定手术和一般知情同意书,可以避免未来潜在的并发症和伦理问题,从而确保患者获得足够的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Future Perspective of Risk Prediction in Aesthetic Surgery: Is Artificial Intelligence Reliable?

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques are showing significant potential in the medical field. The rapid advancement in artificial intelligence methods suggests their soon-to-be essential role in physicians' practices.

Objectives: In this study, we sought to assess and compare the readability, clarity, and precision of medical knowledge responses provided by 3 large language models (LLMs) and informed consent forms for 14 common aesthetic surgical procedures, as prepared by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS).

Methods: The efficacy, readability, and accuracy of 3 leading LLMs, ChatGPT-4 (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA), Gemini (Google, Mountain View, CA), and Copilot (Microsoft, Redmond, WA), was systematically evaluated with 14 different prompts related to the risks of 14 common aesthetic procedures. Alongside these LLM responses, risk sections from the informed consent forms for these procedures, provided by the ASPS, were also reviewed.

Results: The risk factor segments of the combined general and specific operation consent forms were rated highest for medical knowledge accuracy (P < .05). Regarding readability and clarity, the procedure-specific informed consent forms, including LLMs, scored highest scores (P < .05). However, these same forms received the lowest score for medical knowledge accuracy (P < .05). Interestingly, surgeons preferred patient-facing materials created by ChatGPT-4, citing superior accuracy and medical information compared to other AI tools.

Conclusions: Physicians prefer patient-facing materials created by ChatGPT-4 over other AI tools due to their precise and comprehensive medical knowledge. Importantly, adherence to the strong recommendation of ASPS for signing both the procedure-specific and the general informed consent forms can avoid potential future complications and ethical concerns, thereby ensuring patients receive adequate information.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
20.70%
发文量
309
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Aesthetic Surgery Journal is a peer-reviewed international journal focusing on scientific developments and clinical techniques in aesthetic surgery. The official publication of The Aesthetic Society, ASJ is also the official English-language journal of many major international societies of plastic, aesthetic and reconstructive surgery representing South America, Central America, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It is also the official journal of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and The Rhinoplasty Society.
×
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