ChatGPT能否成为一种工具,能够为减肥手术后的患者提供合格的、感同身受的、自信的答案?其版本比较分析。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
André Vicente Bigolin, Juliano Nunes Chibiaque de Lima, João Vicente Machado Grossi, Isabela Hartmann Rost, Morghana Machado da Rosa, Franco Piccolotto Concolatto
{"title":"ChatGPT能否成为一种工具,能够为减肥手术后的患者提供合格的、感同身受的、自信的答案?其版本比较分析。","authors":"André Vicente Bigolin, Juliano Nunes Chibiaque de Lima, João Vicente Machado Grossi, Isabela Hartmann Rost, Morghana Machado da Rosa, Franco Piccolotto Concolatto","doi":"10.1007/s11695-025-08306-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing healthcare by providing advanced tools that enhance clinical practice. Bariatric surgery, a key treatment for severe obesity, requires consistent postoperative care to ensure optimal outcomes, which can be challenging. AI, including ChatGPT, has been employed in various medical fields, but its role in postoperative bariatric surgery follow-up remains underexplored. This study evaluates and compares the effectiveness of ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 in responding to common postoperative questions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional pilot study, where a multidisciplinary team of bariatric surgery experts identified ten frequently asked questions related to the postoperative period. These questions were presented to ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 under a standardized prompt simulating a real patient interaction. The responses were evaluated by a group of specialists using criteria such as response quality, empathy, safety, and clinical acceptance. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare the performance of the two versions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis revealed that ChatGPT 4 showed a trend toward better performance compared to GPT-3.5, particularly in accuracy and safety, although several comparisons did not reach statistical significance. Additionally, both versions demonstrated a high level of empathy, though ChatGPT 4 showed a superior ability to provide clinically acceptable and safe responses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ChatGPT has demonstrated the ability to provide qualified, empathetic, and clear responses to most questions. ChatGPT-4, in particular, offered more satisfactory responses with fewer errors. The tool shows great potential in the therapeutic approach for bariatric surgery patients, but further studies are needed to enhance its safe and effective use by both physicians and patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":19460,"journal":{"name":"Obesity Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Could ChatGPT Be a Tool Capable of Providing Qualified, Empathetic, and Assertive Answers to Patients After Bariatric Surgery? A Comparative Analysis of Its Versions.\",\"authors\":\"André Vicente Bigolin, Juliano Nunes Chibiaque de Lima, João Vicente Machado Grossi, Isabela Hartmann Rost, Morghana Machado da Rosa, Franco Piccolotto Concolatto\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11695-025-08306-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing healthcare by providing advanced tools that enhance clinical practice. Bariatric surgery, a key treatment for severe obesity, requires consistent postoperative care to ensure optimal outcomes, which can be challenging. AI, including ChatGPT, has been employed in various medical fields, but its role in postoperative bariatric surgery follow-up remains underexplored. This study evaluates and compares the effectiveness of ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 in responding to common postoperative questions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional pilot study, where a multidisciplinary team of bariatric surgery experts identified ten frequently asked questions related to the postoperative period. These questions were presented to ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 under a standardized prompt simulating a real patient interaction. The responses were evaluated by a group of specialists using criteria such as response quality, empathy, safety, and clinical acceptance. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare the performance of the two versions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis revealed that ChatGPT 4 showed a trend toward better performance compared to GPT-3.5, particularly in accuracy and safety, although several comparisons did not reach statistical significance. Additionally, both versions demonstrated a high level of empathy, though ChatGPT 4 showed a superior ability to provide clinically acceptable and safe responses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ChatGPT has demonstrated the ability to provide qualified, empathetic, and clear responses to most questions. ChatGPT-4, in particular, offered more satisfactory responses with fewer errors. The tool shows great potential in the therapeutic approach for bariatric surgery patients, but further studies are needed to enhance its safe and effective use by both physicians and patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obesity Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obesity Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-025-08306-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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":"Obesity Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-025-08306-5","RegionNum":3,"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

人工智能(AI)通过提供增强临床实践的先进工具,正在彻底改变医疗保健。减肥手术是严重肥胖的关键治疗方法,需要持续的术后护理以确保最佳结果,这可能具有挑战性。包括ChatGPT在内的人工智能已被应用于各个医疗领域,但其在减肥手术术后随访中的作用仍未得到充分探索。本研究评估并比较了ChatGPT 3.5和4在回答常见术后问题方面的有效性。方法:一项横断面的试点研究,一个多学科的减肥手术专家小组确定了与术后期相关的10个常见问题。这些问题在模拟真实患者交互的标准化提示下呈现给ChatGPT 3.5和4。这些反应由一组专家根据反应质量、移情、安全性和临床接受度等标准进行评估。对两个版本的性能进行了统计分析比较。结果:分析显示,ChatGPT 4与GPT-3.5相比,表现出更好的性能趋势,特别是在准确性和安全性方面,尽管有几项比较没有达到统计学意义。此外,尽管ChatGPT 4在提供临床可接受和安全的反应方面表现出更强的能力,但这两个版本都表现出了高水平的同理心。结论:ChatGPT已经展示了对大多数问题提供合格的、有同理心的、清晰的回答的能力。特别是ChatGPT-4,提供了更令人满意的回答,错误更少。该工具在减肥手术患者的治疗方法中显示出巨大的潜力,但需要进一步的研究来提高医生和患者使用它的安全性和有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Could ChatGPT Be a Tool Capable of Providing Qualified, Empathetic, and Assertive Answers to Patients After Bariatric Surgery? A Comparative Analysis of Its Versions.

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing healthcare by providing advanced tools that enhance clinical practice. Bariatric surgery, a key treatment for severe obesity, requires consistent postoperative care to ensure optimal outcomes, which can be challenging. AI, including ChatGPT, has been employed in various medical fields, but its role in postoperative bariatric surgery follow-up remains underexplored. This study evaluates and compares the effectiveness of ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 in responding to common postoperative questions.

Methods: A cross-sectional pilot study, where a multidisciplinary team of bariatric surgery experts identified ten frequently asked questions related to the postoperative period. These questions were presented to ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 under a standardized prompt simulating a real patient interaction. The responses were evaluated by a group of specialists using criteria such as response quality, empathy, safety, and clinical acceptance. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare the performance of the two versions.

Results: The analysis revealed that ChatGPT 4 showed a trend toward better performance compared to GPT-3.5, particularly in accuracy and safety, although several comparisons did not reach statistical significance. Additionally, both versions demonstrated a high level of empathy, though ChatGPT 4 showed a superior ability to provide clinically acceptable and safe responses.

Conclusion: ChatGPT has demonstrated the ability to provide qualified, empathetic, and clear responses to most questions. ChatGPT-4, in particular, offered more satisfactory responses with fewer errors. The tool shows great potential in the therapeutic approach for bariatric surgery patients, but further studies are needed to enhance its safe and effective use by both physicians and patients.

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
Obesity Surgery
Obesity Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
24.10%
发文量
567
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Obesity Surgery is the official journal of the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and metabolic disorders (IFSO). A journal for bariatric/metabolic surgeons, Obesity Surgery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for communicating the latest research, surgical and laparoscopic techniques, for treatment of massive obesity and metabolic disorders. Topics covered include original research, clinical reports, current status, guidelines, historical notes, invited commentaries, letters to the editor, medicolegal issues, meeting abstracts, modern surgery/technical innovations, new concepts, reviews, scholarly presentations and opinions. Obesity Surgery benefits surgeons performing obesity/metabolic surgery, general surgeons and surgical residents, endoscopists, anesthetists, support staff, nurses, dietitians, psychiatrists, psychologists, plastic surgeons, internists including endocrinologists and diabetologists, nutritional scientists, and those dealing with eating disorders.
×
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