在下腔静脉滤器患者教育中利用人工智能生成模型。

IF 1.7 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Som P Singh, Aleena Jamal, Farah Qureshi, Rohma Zaidi, Fawad Qureshi
{"title":"在下腔静脉滤器患者教育中利用人工智能生成模型。","authors":"Som P Singh, Aleena Jamal, Farah Qureshi, Rohma Zaidi, Fawad Qureshi","doi":"10.3390/clinpract14040121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filters have become an advantageous treatment modality for patients with venous thromboembolism. As the use of these filters continues to grow, it is imperative for providers to appropriately educate patients in a comprehensive yet understandable manner. Likewise, generative artificial intelligence models are a growing tool in patient education, but there is little understanding of the readability of these tools on IVC filters. <b>Methods</b>: This study aimed to determine the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch-Kincaid, and Gunning Fog readability of IVC Filter patient educational materials generated by these artificial intelligence models. <b>Results</b>: The ChatGPT cohort had the highest mean Gunning Fog score at 17.76 ± 1.62 and the lowest at 11.58 ± 1.55 among the Copilot cohort. The difference between groups for Flesch Reading Ease scores (<i>p</i> = 8.70408 × 10<sup>-8</sup>) was found to be statistically significant albeit with priori power found to be low at 0.392. <b>Conclusions</b>: The results of this study indicate that the answers generated by the Microsoft Copilot cohort offers a greater degree of readability compared to ChatGPT cohort regarding IVC filters. Nevertheless, the mean Flesch-Kincaid readability for both cohorts does not meet the recommended U.S. grade reading levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":45306,"journal":{"name":"Clinics and Practice","volume":"14 4","pages":"1507-1514"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11352489/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leveraging Generative Artificial Intelligence Models in Patient Education on Inferior Vena Cava Filters.\",\"authors\":\"Som P Singh, Aleena Jamal, Farah Qureshi, Rohma Zaidi, Fawad Qureshi\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/clinpract14040121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filters have become an advantageous treatment modality for patients with venous thromboembolism. As the use of these filters continues to grow, it is imperative for providers to appropriately educate patients in a comprehensive yet understandable manner. Likewise, generative artificial intelligence models are a growing tool in patient education, but there is little understanding of the readability of these tools on IVC filters. <b>Methods</b>: This study aimed to determine the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch-Kincaid, and Gunning Fog readability of IVC Filter patient educational materials generated by these artificial intelligence models. <b>Results</b>: The ChatGPT cohort had the highest mean Gunning Fog score at 17.76 ± 1.62 and the lowest at 11.58 ± 1.55 among the Copilot cohort. The difference between groups for Flesch Reading Ease scores (<i>p</i> = 8.70408 × 10<sup>-8</sup>) was found to be statistically significant albeit with priori power found to be low at 0.392. <b>Conclusions</b>: The results of this study indicate that the answers generated by the Microsoft Copilot cohort offers a greater degree of readability compared to ChatGPT cohort regarding IVC filters. Nevertheless, the mean Flesch-Kincaid readability for both cohorts does not meet the recommended U.S. grade reading levels.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinics and Practice\",\"volume\":\"14 4\",\"pages\":\"1507-1514\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11352489/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinics and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/clinpract14040121\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/clinpract14040121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:下腔静脉(IVC)滤器已成为静脉血栓栓塞患者的一种有利治疗方式。随着下腔静脉滤器使用率的不断提高,医疗服务提供者必须以一种全面但易于理解的方式对患者进行适当的教育。同样,生成式人工智能模型在患者教育方面也是一种不断发展的工具,但人们对这些工具在 IVC 过滤器方面的可读性了解甚少。方法:本研究旨在确定由这些人工智能模型生成的 IVC 过滤器患者教育材料的 Flesch Reading Ease (FRE)、Flesch-Kincaid 和 Gunning Fog 可读性。结果:在 Copilot 群体中,ChatGPT 群体的平均 Gunning Fog 得分最高(17.76 ± 1.62),最低(11.58 ± 1.55)。各组间的 Flesch 阅读轻松度得分差异(p = 8.70408 × 10-8)具有统计学意义,尽管先验功率较低,仅为 0.392。结论本研究结果表明,与 ChatGPT 群体相比,Microsoft Copilot 群体生成的有关 IVC 过滤器的答案具有更高的可读性。尽管如此,两个队列的平均 Flesch-Kincaid 可读性均未达到建议的美国年级阅读水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Leveraging Generative Artificial Intelligence Models in Patient Education on Inferior Vena Cava Filters.

Background: Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filters have become an advantageous treatment modality for patients with venous thromboembolism. As the use of these filters continues to grow, it is imperative for providers to appropriately educate patients in a comprehensive yet understandable manner. Likewise, generative artificial intelligence models are a growing tool in patient education, but there is little understanding of the readability of these tools on IVC filters. Methods: This study aimed to determine the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch-Kincaid, and Gunning Fog readability of IVC Filter patient educational materials generated by these artificial intelligence models. Results: The ChatGPT cohort had the highest mean Gunning Fog score at 17.76 ± 1.62 and the lowest at 11.58 ± 1.55 among the Copilot cohort. The difference between groups for Flesch Reading Ease scores (p = 8.70408 × 10-8) was found to be statistically significant albeit with priori power found to be low at 0.392. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that the answers generated by the Microsoft Copilot cohort offers a greater degree of readability compared to ChatGPT cohort regarding IVC filters. Nevertheless, the mean Flesch-Kincaid readability for both cohorts does not meet the recommended U.S. grade reading levels.

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
Clinics and Practice
Clinics and Practice MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
91
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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