(096) REAL WORLD UTILITY OF CHATGPT IN PRE-VASECTOMY COUNSELLING IN AN OFFICE-BASED SETTING: A PILOT STUDY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction There is increasing interest among the medical community on to developing new ways to utilize ChatGPT. New applications have included writing scientific manuscripts, drafting correspondents, as well as testing its ability on standardized medical licensing examinations. Despite ChatGPT demonstrating good medical knowledge, it is still unclear if this translates to real world clinical practice. A potential application of this technology is to provide patient counseling and to improve patient flow in one’s practice. Objective Our goal is to assess if pre-vasectomy counseling with ChatGPT safely streamlines the consultation process by reducing visit times and increasing patient satisfaction through the consultation process. Methods A single institutional prospective, randomized single-blinded pilot study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy for the use of ChatGPT (v4.0) for pre-vasectomy counselling. All eligible patients who are interested in undergoing vasectomy were included in the study. Patients were excluded if unwilling to participate in the study or did not have a home computer/internet connection to interact with the ChatGPT software. Patient were randomized 1:1 to pre-appointment counselling with ChatGPT + standard in-person consultation to in-person consultation alone. Baseline demographic information was collected including age, level of education. Outcomes collected at that time were length of visit, number of questions, as well as a Likert scale (/10) questionnaire assessing participant satisfaction in the ChatGPT counselling. Chat logs were reviewed by 2 men’s health specialists to assess the accuracy and safety of ChatGPT responses. Descriptive statistics were performed as well as comparative analysis with the independent sample t-test method. Results Total of 18 patients were analyzed with a mean age of 35.8 (±) 5.4 (n = 9) in the intervention arm and 36.9 (±) 7.4 (n = 9) in the control arm. Overall pre-vasectomy counselling with ChatGPT was associated with provider perceived improved understanding of the procedures (8.8 ± 1.0 vs 6.7 ± 2.8; p = 0.047) and decreased length of in-person consultation (7.7 ± 2.3 min vs 10.6 ± 3.4 min; p = 0.05). Patients however reported no difference in how they rated the quality of their clinical encounter, with excellent scores seen in all domains. Patient experiences with ChatGPT in respect to pre-vasectomy counseling was also surveyed. Quality of information provided by ChatGPT, ease of access/use, and overall experience were rated highly at 8.3 (±) 1.9, 9.1 (±) 1.5, and 8.6 (±) 1.7 respectively. Some participants did express concern regarding the confidentiality of information at 4.9 (±) 2.9. Of the 19 total questions and responses provided by ChatGPT, 95% (n = 18/19) were considered to be accurate responses. Conclusions ChatGPT for pre-vasectomy counselling did show to improve the efficiency of encounters and provider perceived patient understanding of the procedure. ChatGPT was also able to provide accurate responses to questions regarding the vasectomy in 95% of cases. Disclosure Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Boston Scientific.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».