评估韩国牙周病学会在线问答部分对患者问题的回答的质量和同理心:一项比较牙周病医生和人工智能聊天机器人的横断面研究。

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Jae-Hong Lee, So-Hae Oh, Falk Schwendicke, Akhilanand Chaurasia, Young-Taek Kim
{"title":"评估韩国牙周病学会在线问答部分对患者问题的回答的质量和同理心:一项比较牙周病医生和人工智能聊天机器人的横断面研究。","authors":"Jae-Hong Lee, So-Hae Oh, Falk Schwendicke, Akhilanand Chaurasia, Young-Taek Kim","doi":"10.5051/jpis.2402220111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate and compare the responses of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered chatbot and professional periodontists to patient queries in periodontology and implantology, using the Korean Academy of Periodontology's (KAP) online question and answer (Q&A) section.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this comparative cross-sectional study, we analyzed 219 patient-submitted periodontal and implant knowledge questions from the KAP online Q&A section. A panel of 10 evaluators-5 periodontists and 5 laypersons-rated both the periodontist's and the AI chatbot's responses using standardized scales. We applied the <i>t</i>-test and Spearman correlation coefficients to compare response quality, empathy, consistency, and evaluator preferences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten evaluators judged the AI chatbot's responses to be significantly superior in quality and empathy compared to periodontist replies. A higher proportion of periodontist responses fell below acceptable quality (\"very poor\" or \"poor\") than chatbot responses (28.7% vs. 15.0%; <i>P</i><0.001), and more chatbot replies were rated \"empathetic\" or \"very empathetic\" (62.5% vs. 42.8%; <i>P</i><0.001). Overall response consistency was deemed satisfactory at 64.2%, with no significant difference in consistency or preference between periodontist and lay evaluators.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AI-powered chatbots can deliver more accurate and empathetic answers than human periodontists, suggesting their potential role as consultation assistants merits further investigation. The high intraclass correlation coefficient values (0.79-0.93) indicate a high level of agreement among evaluators in both the periodontist and lay evaluator groups, thus confirming the reliability and robustness of the study's assessment methodology.</p>","PeriodicalId":48795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the quality and empathy of responses to patient questions on the Korean Academy of Periodontology's online question and answer section: a cross-sectional study comparing periodontists and an AI-powered chatbot.\",\"authors\":\"Jae-Hong Lee, So-Hae Oh, Falk Schwendicke, Akhilanand Chaurasia, Young-Taek Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.5051/jpis.2402220111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate and compare the responses of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered chatbot and professional periodontists to patient queries in periodontology and implantology, using the Korean Academy of Periodontology's (KAP) online question and answer (Q&A) section.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this comparative cross-sectional study, we analyzed 219 patient-submitted periodontal and implant knowledge questions from the KAP online Q&A section. A panel of 10 evaluators-5 periodontists and 5 laypersons-rated both the periodontist's and the AI chatbot's responses using standardized scales. We applied the <i>t</i>-test and Spearman correlation coefficients to compare response quality, empathy, consistency, and evaluator preferences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten evaluators judged the AI chatbot's responses to be significantly superior in quality and empathy compared to periodontist replies. A higher proportion of periodontist responses fell below acceptable quality (\\\"very poor\\\" or \\\"poor\\\") than chatbot responses (28.7% vs. 15.0%; <i>P</i><0.001), and more chatbot replies were rated \\\"empathetic\\\" or \\\"very empathetic\\\" (62.5% vs. 42.8%; <i>P</i><0.001). Overall response consistency was deemed satisfactory at 64.2%, with no significant difference in consistency or preference between periodontist and lay evaluators.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AI-powered chatbots can deliver more accurate and empathetic answers than human periodontists, suggesting their potential role as consultation assistants merits further investigation. The high intraclass correlation coefficient values (0.79-0.93) indicate a high level of agreement among evaluators in both the periodontist and lay evaluator groups, thus confirming the reliability and robustness of the study's assessment methodology.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2402220111\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2402220111","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在利用韩国牙周病学会(KAP)的在线问答(Q&A)部分,评估和比较人工智能(AI)聊天机器人和专业牙周病医生对牙周病和种植学患者询问的反应。方法:在这个比较横断面研究中,我们分析了来自KAP在线问答部分的219个患者提交的牙周和种植知识问题。一个由10名评估人员组成的小组——5名牙周病医生和5名非专业人员——使用标准化量表对牙周病医生和人工智能聊天机器人的回答进行评分。我们应用t检验和Spearman相关系数来比较反应质量、共情、一致性和评估者偏好。结果:10名评估者认为人工智能聊天机器人的回答在质量和同理心方面明显优于牙周病医生的回答。牙周病医生的回答低于可接受质量(“非常差”或“差”)的比例高于聊天机器人的回答(28.7%对15.0%;结论:人工智能聊天机器人可以提供比人类牙周病医生更准确、更有同理心的答案,这表明它们作为咨询助手的潜在作用值得进一步研究。高组内相关系数值(0.79-0.93)表明牙周病专家组和非专业评估者组的评估者高度一致,从而证实了该研究评估方法的可靠性和稳健性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating the quality and empathy of responses to patient questions on the Korean Academy of Periodontology's online question and answer section: a cross-sectional study comparing periodontists and an AI-powered chatbot.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the responses of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered chatbot and professional periodontists to patient queries in periodontology and implantology, using the Korean Academy of Periodontology's (KAP) online question and answer (Q&A) section.

Methods: In this comparative cross-sectional study, we analyzed 219 patient-submitted periodontal and implant knowledge questions from the KAP online Q&A section. A panel of 10 evaluators-5 periodontists and 5 laypersons-rated both the periodontist's and the AI chatbot's responses using standardized scales. We applied the t-test and Spearman correlation coefficients to compare response quality, empathy, consistency, and evaluator preferences.

Results: Ten evaluators judged the AI chatbot's responses to be significantly superior in quality and empathy compared to periodontist replies. A higher proportion of periodontist responses fell below acceptable quality ("very poor" or "poor") than chatbot responses (28.7% vs. 15.0%; P<0.001), and more chatbot replies were rated "empathetic" or "very empathetic" (62.5% vs. 42.8%; P<0.001). Overall response consistency was deemed satisfactory at 64.2%, with no significant difference in consistency or preference between periodontist and lay evaluators.

Conclusions: AI-powered chatbots can deliver more accurate and empathetic answers than human periodontists, suggesting their potential role as consultation assistants merits further investigation. The high intraclass correlation coefficient values (0.79-0.93) indicate a high level of agreement among evaluators in both the periodontist and lay evaluator groups, thus confirming the reliability and robustness of the study's assessment methodology.

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
Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science (JPIS) is a peer-reviewed and open-access journal providing up-to-date information relevant to professionalism of periodontology and dental implantology. JPIS is dedicated to global and extensive publication which includes evidence-based original articles, and fundamental reviews in order to cover a variety of interests in the field of periodontal as well as implant science.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信