PRO-READ IR:利用大语言模型增强介入放射学中以患者为中心的程序信息可读性。

Tarig Elhakim, Allison R Brea, Wilton Fidelis, Sriram S Paravastu, Mira Malavia, Mustafa Omer, Ana Mort, Shakthi Kumaran Ramasamy, Satvik Tripathi, Michael Dezube, Sara Smolinski-Zhao, Dania Daye
{"title":"PRO-READ IR:利用大语言模型增强介入放射学中以患者为中心的程序信息可读性。","authors":"Tarig Elhakim, Allison R Brea, Wilton Fidelis, Sriram S Paravastu, Mira Malavia, Mustafa Omer, Ana Mort, Shakthi Kumaran Ramasamy, Satvik Tripathi, Michael Dezube, Sara Smolinski-Zhao, Dania Daye","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2024.08.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the extent to which Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4) can educate patients by generating easily understandable information about the most common interventional radiology (IR) procedures.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We reviewed 10 IR procedures and prepared prompts for GPT-4 to provide patient educational instructions about each procedure in layman's terms. The instructions were then evaluated by four clinical physicians and nine nonclinical assessors to determine their clinical appropriateness, understandability, and clarity using a survey. A grade-level readability assessment was performed using validated metrics to evaluate accessibility to a wide patient population. The same procedures were also evaluated from the patient instructions available at radiologyinfo.org and compared with GPT-generated instructions utilizing a paired t test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Evaluation by four clinical physicians shows that nine GPT-generated instructions were fully appropriate, whereas arterial embolization instructions was somewhat appropriate. Evaluation by nine nonclinical assessors shows that paracentesis, dialysis catheter placement, thrombectomy, ultrasound-guided biopsy, and nephrostomy-tube instructions were rated excellent by 57% and good by 43%. The arterial embolization and biliary-drain instructions were rated excellent by 28.6% and good by 71.4%. In contrast, thoracentesis, port placement, and CT-guided biopsy instructions received 43% excellent, 43% good, and 14% fair. The readability assessment across all procedural instructions showed a better Flesch-Kincaid mean grade of GPT-4 instructions compared with radiologyinfo.org (7.8 ± 0.87 versus 9.6 ± 0.83; P = .007) indicating excellent readability at 7th- to 8th-grade level compared with 9th to 10th grade. Additionally there was a lower Gunning Fog mean index (10.4 ± 1.2 versus 12.7 ± 0.93; P = .006), and higher Flesch Reading Ease mean score (69.4 ± 4.8 versus 51.3±3.9; P = .0001) indicating better readability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>IR procedural instructions generated by GPT-4 can aid in improving health literacy and patient-centered care in IR by generating easily understandable explanations.</p>","PeriodicalId":73968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PRO-READ IR: Enhanced PROcedural Information READability for Patient-Centered Care in Interventional Radiology With Large Language Models.\",\"authors\":\"Tarig Elhakim, Allison R Brea, Wilton Fidelis, Sriram S Paravastu, Mira Malavia, Mustafa Omer, Ana Mort, Shakthi Kumaran Ramasamy, Satvik Tripathi, Michael Dezube, Sara Smolinski-Zhao, Dania Daye\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jacr.2024.08.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the extent to which Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4) can educate patients by generating easily understandable information about the most common interventional radiology (IR) procedures.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We reviewed 10 IR procedures and prepared prompts for GPT-4 to provide patient educational instructions about each procedure in layman's terms. The instructions were then evaluated by four clinical physicians and nine nonclinical assessors to determine their clinical appropriateness, understandability, and clarity using a survey. A grade-level readability assessment was performed using validated metrics to evaluate accessibility to a wide patient population. The same procedures were also evaluated from the patient instructions available at radiologyinfo.org and compared with GPT-generated instructions utilizing a paired t test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Evaluation by four clinical physicians shows that nine GPT-generated instructions were fully appropriate, whereas arterial embolization instructions was somewhat appropriate. Evaluation by nine nonclinical assessors shows that paracentesis, dialysis catheter placement, thrombectomy, ultrasound-guided biopsy, and nephrostomy-tube instructions were rated excellent by 57% and good by 43%. The arterial embolization and biliary-drain instructions were rated excellent by 28.6% and good by 71.4%. In contrast, thoracentesis, port placement, and CT-guided biopsy instructions received 43% excellent, 43% good, and 14% fair. The readability assessment across all procedural instructions showed a better Flesch-Kincaid mean grade of GPT-4 instructions compared with radiologyinfo.org (7.8 ± 0.87 versus 9.6 ± 0.83; P = .007) indicating excellent readability at 7th- to 8th-grade level compared with 9th to 10th grade. Additionally there was a lower Gunning Fog mean index (10.4 ± 1.2 versus 12.7 ± 0.93; P = .006), and higher Flesch Reading Ease mean score (69.4 ± 4.8 versus 51.3±3.9; P = .0001) indicating better readability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>IR procedural instructions generated by GPT-4 can aid in improving health literacy and patient-centered care in IR by generating easily understandable explanations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73968,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2024.08.010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2024.08.010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估 GPT-4 在多大程度上可以通过生成有关最常见的介入放射学(IR)手术的易懂信息来教育患者:我们回顾了 10 种介入放射学手术,并为 GPT-4 准备了提示,以通俗易懂的语言为患者提供有关每种手术的教育指导。然后由 4 名临床医生和 9 名非临床评估人员对这些说明进行评估,通过调查确定其临床适宜性、可理解性和清晰度。使用经过验证的指标对可读性进行了分级评估,以评估广大患者的易读性。此外,还对放射学信息网站(radioologyinfo.org)上的患者指南中的相同程序进行了评估,并通过配对 t 检验将其与 GPT 生成的指南进行了比较:结果:由 4 名临床医师进行的评估显示,9 份 GPT 生成的说明完全正确,而动脉栓塞说明则有些不妥。9 名非临床评估人员的评估结果显示,57% 的人认为腹腔穿刺术、透析导管置入术、血栓切除术、超声引导活组织检查和肾造瘘管术的指导非常好,43% 的人认为很好。动脉栓塞术和胆道引流术的指导被 28.6% 的人评为 "优",71.4% 的人评为 "良"。相比之下,胸腔穿刺术、穿刺孔置入术和 CT 引导下活检术说明的优秀率为 43%,良好率为 43%,一般率为 14%。对所有手术指南的可读性评估显示,GPT-4指南的Flesch-Kincaid平均等级比radioologyinfo.org高(7.8±0.87 vs 9.6±0.83,p=0.007),表明7-8年级的可读性比9-10年级的优秀。此外,Gunning-Fog平均指数(10.4±1.2 vs. 12.7±0.93,p=0.006)更低,Flesch阅读轻松度平均分(69.4±4.8 vs. 51.3±3.9,p=0.0001)更高,表明可读性更好:结论:由GPT-4生成的IR程序说明通过生成易于理解的解释,有助于提高IR的健康素养和以患者为中心的护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
PRO-READ IR: Enhanced PROcedural Information READability for Patient-Centered Care in Interventional Radiology With Large Language Models.

Purpose: To evaluate the extent to which Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4) can educate patients by generating easily understandable information about the most common interventional radiology (IR) procedures.

Materials and methods: We reviewed 10 IR procedures and prepared prompts for GPT-4 to provide patient educational instructions about each procedure in layman's terms. The instructions were then evaluated by four clinical physicians and nine nonclinical assessors to determine their clinical appropriateness, understandability, and clarity using a survey. A grade-level readability assessment was performed using validated metrics to evaluate accessibility to a wide patient population. The same procedures were also evaluated from the patient instructions available at radiologyinfo.org and compared with GPT-generated instructions utilizing a paired t test.

Results: Evaluation by four clinical physicians shows that nine GPT-generated instructions were fully appropriate, whereas arterial embolization instructions was somewhat appropriate. Evaluation by nine nonclinical assessors shows that paracentesis, dialysis catheter placement, thrombectomy, ultrasound-guided biopsy, and nephrostomy-tube instructions were rated excellent by 57% and good by 43%. The arterial embolization and biliary-drain instructions were rated excellent by 28.6% and good by 71.4%. In contrast, thoracentesis, port placement, and CT-guided biopsy instructions received 43% excellent, 43% good, and 14% fair. The readability assessment across all procedural instructions showed a better Flesch-Kincaid mean grade of GPT-4 instructions compared with radiologyinfo.org (7.8 ± 0.87 versus 9.6 ± 0.83; P = .007) indicating excellent readability at 7th- to 8th-grade level compared with 9th to 10th grade. Additionally there was a lower Gunning Fog mean index (10.4 ± 1.2 versus 12.7 ± 0.93; P = .006), and higher Flesch Reading Ease mean score (69.4 ± 4.8 versus 51.3±3.9; P = .0001) indicating better readability.

Conclusion: IR procedural instructions generated by GPT-4 can aid in improving health literacy and patient-centered care in IR by generating easily understandable explanations.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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