2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      ChatGPT vs UpToDate: comparative study of usefulness and reliability of Chatbot in common clinical presentations of otorhinolaryngology–head and neck surgery

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          The usage of Chatbots as a kind of Artificial Intelligence in medicine is getting to increase in recent years. UpToDate® is another well-known search tool established on evidence-based knowledge and is used daily by doctors worldwide. In this study, we aimed to investigate the usefulness and reliability of ChatGPT compared to UpToDate in Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery (ORL–HNS).

          Materials and methods

          ChatGPT-3.5 and UpToDate were interrogated for the management of 25 common clinical case scenarios (13 males/12 females) recruited from literature considering the daily observation at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology of Ege University Faculty of Medicine. Scientific references for the management were requested for each clinical case. The accuracy of the references in the ChatGPT answers was assessed on a 0–2 scale and the usefulness of the ChatGPT and UpToDate answers was assessed with 1–3 scores by reviewers. UpToDate and ChatGPT 3.5 responses were compared.

          Results

          ChatGPT did not give references in some questions in contrast to UpToDate. Information on the ChatGPT was limited to 2021. UpToDate supported the paper with subheadings, tables, figures, and algorithms. The mean accuracy score of references in ChatGPT answers was 0.25–weak/unrelated. The median ( Q1– Q3) was 1.00 (1.25–2.00) for ChatGPT and 2.63 (2.75–3.00) for UpToDate, the difference was statistically significant ( p < 0.001). UpToDate was observed more useful and reliable than ChatGPT.

          Conclusions

          ChatGPT has the potential to support the physicians to find out the information but our results suggest that ChatGPT needs to be improved to increase the usefulness and reliability of medical evidence-based knowledge.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00405-023-08423-w.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Obstructive sleep apnea is a common disorder in the population-a review on the epidemiology of sleep apnea.

          The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) defined at an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥5 was a mean of 22% (range, 9-37%) in men and 17% (range, 4-50%) in women in eleven published epidemiological studies published between 1993 and 2013. OSA with excessive daytime sleepiness occurred in 6% (range, 3-18%) of men and in 4% (range, 1-17%) of women. The prevalence increased with time and OSA was reported in 37% of men and in 50% of women in studies from 2008 and 2013 respectively. OSA is more prevalent in men than in women and increases with age and obesity. Smoking and alcohol consumption are also suggested as risk factors, but the results are conflicting. Excessive daytime sleepiness is suggested as the most important symptom of OSA, but only a fraction of subjects with AHI >5 report daytime sleepiness and one study did not find any relationship between daytime sleepiness and sleep apnea in women. Stroke and hypertension and coronary artery disease are associated with sleep apnea. Cross-sectional studies indicate an association between OSA and diabetes mellitus. Patients younger than 70 years run an increased risk of early death if they suffer from OSA. It is concluded that OSA is highly prevalent in the population. It is related to age and obesity. Only a part of subjects with OSA in the population have symptoms of daytime sleepiness. The prevalence of OSA has increased in epidemiological studies over time. Differences and the increase in prevalence of sleep apnea are probably due to different diagnostic equipment, definitions, study design and characteristics of included subjects including effects of the obesity epidemic. Cardiovascular disease, especially stroke is related to OSA, and subjects under the age of 70 run an increased risk of early death if they suffer from OSA.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Clinical Practice Guideline: Sudden Hearing Loss (Update)

            Sudden hearing loss is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a health care provider. It is frequently but not universally accompanied by tinnitus and/or vertigo. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 27 per 100,000 people annually, with about 66,000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline update provides evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients who present with sudden hearing loss. It focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss in adult patients aged ≥18 years and primarily on those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Prompt recognition and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life. The guideline update is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with sudden hearing loss. The purpose of this guideline update is to provide clinicians with evidence-based recommendations in evaluating patients with sudden hearing loss and sudden sensorineural hearing loss, with particular emphasis on managing idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group recognized that patients enter the health care system with sudden hearing loss as a nonspecific primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of this guideline update address distinguishing sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss at the time of presentation with hearing loss. They also clarify the need to identify rare, nonidiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to help separate those patients from those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss, who are the target population for the therapeutic interventions that make up the bulk of the guideline update. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, this guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients. Consistent with the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation’s “Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual, Third Edition” (Rosenfeld et al. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;148[1]:S1-S55), the guideline update group was convened with representation from the disciplines of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, otology, neurotology, family medicine, audiology, emergency medicine, neurology, radiology, advanced practice nursing, and consumer advocacy. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the prior clinical practice guideline on sudden hearing loss was reviewed in detail. Key Action Statements (KASs) were updated with new literature, and evidence profiles were brought up to the current standard. Research needs identified in the original clinical practice guideline and data addressing them were reviewed. Current research needs were identified and delineated. The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following: (KAS 1) Clinicians should distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss when a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss. (KAS 7) Clinicians should educate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy. (KAS 13) Clinicians should counsel patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus about the possible benefits of audiologic rehabilitation and other supportive measures. These strong recommendations were modified from the initial clinical practice guideline for clarity and timing of intervention. The guideline update group made strong recommendations against the following: (KAS 3) Clinicians should not order routine computed tomography of the head in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 5) Clinicians should not obtain routine laboratory tests in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 11) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, or vasoactive substances to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following: (KAS 2) Clinicians should assess patients with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss through history and physical examination for bilateral sudden hearing loss, recurrent episodes of sudden hearing loss, and/or focal neurologic findings. (KAS 4) In patients with sudden hearing loss, clinicians should obtain, or refer to a clinician who can obtain, audiometry as soon as possible (within 14 days of symptom onset) to confirm the diagnosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 6) Clinicians should evaluate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining magnetic resonance imaging or auditory brainstem response. (KAS 10) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, intratympanic steroid therapy when patients have incomplete recovery from sudden sensorineural hearing loss 2 to 6 weeks after onset of symptoms. (KAS 12) Clinicians should obtain follow-up audiometric evaluation for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss at the conclusion of treatment and within 6 months of completion of treatment. These recommendations were clarified in terms of timing of intervention and audiometry and method of retrocochlear workup. The guideline update group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 8) Clinicians may offer corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss within 2 weeks of symptom onset. (KAS 9a) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy within 2 weeks of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 9b) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy as salvage therapy within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, and differences of opinion Included 10 clinical practice guidelines, 29 new systematic reviews, and 36 new randomized controlled trials Highlights the urgency of evaluation and initiation of treatment, if treatment is offered, by emphasizing the time from symptom occurrence Clarification of terminology by changing potentially unclear statements; use of the term sudden sensorineural hearing loss to mean idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to emphasize that >90% of sudden sensorineural hearing loss is idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss and to avoid confusion in nomenclature for the reader Changes to the KASs from the original guideline: KAS 1—When a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss, conductive hearing loss should be distinguished from sensorineural. KAS 2—The utility of history and physical examination when assessing for modifying factors is emphasized. KAS 3—The word “routine” is added to clarify that this statement addresses nontargeted head computerized tomography scan that is often ordered in the emergency room setting for patients presenting with sudden hearing loss. It does not refer to targeted scans, such as temporal bone computerized tomography scan, to assess for temporal bone pathology. KAS 4—The importance of audiometric confirmation of hearing status as soon as possible and within 14 days of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 5—New studies were added to confirm the lack of benefit of nontargeted laboratory testing in sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 6—Audiometric follow-up is excluded as a reasonable workup for retrocochlear pathology. Magnetic resonance imaging, computerized tomography scan if magnetic resonance imaging cannot be done, and, secondarily, auditory brainstem response evaluation are the modalities recommended. A time frame for such testing is not specified, nor is it specified which clinician should be ordering this workup; however, it is implied that it would be the general or subspecialty otolaryngologist. KAS 7—The importance of shared decision making is highlighted, and salient points are emphasized. KAS 8—The option for corticosteroid intervention within 2 weeks of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 9—Changed to KAS 9A and 9B. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy remains an option but only when combined with steroid therapy for either initial treatment (9A) or salvage therapy (9B). The timing of initial therapy is within 2 weeks of onset, and that of salvage therapy is within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 10—Intratympanic steroid therapy for salvage is recommended within 2 to 6 weeks following onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The time to treatment is defined and emphasized. KAS 11—Antioxidants were removed from the list of interventions that the clinical practice guideline recommends against using. KAS 12—Follow-up audiometry at conclusion of treatment and also within 6 months posttreatment is added. KAS 13—This statement on audiologic rehabilitation includes patients who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus who may benefit from treatment. Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs Enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making with tools provided to assist in same
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              High agreement but low Kappa: I. the problems of two paradoxes

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                dr.ziya.karimov@gmail.com
                Journal
                Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol
                Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol
                European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0937-4477
                1434-4726
                13 January 2024
                13 January 2024
                2024
                : 281
                : 4
                : 2145-2151
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Medicine Program, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, ( https://ror.org/02eaafc18) 35100 Izmir, Türkiye
                [2 ]Medicine Program, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, ( https://ror.org/03a5qrr21) Istanbul, Türkiye
                [3 ]GRID grid.414882.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0643 0132, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, , Izmir Tepecik Education and Research Hospital, Health Sciences University, ; Izmir, Türkiye
                [4 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, ( https://ror.org/02eaafc18) Izmir, Türkiye
                [5 ]Department of Oncology, Medicana International Hospital, Izmir, Türkiye
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7237-4878
                http://orcid.org/0009-0000-2503-5419
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8455-4400
                http://orcid.org/0009-0002-9872-990X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5551-7731
                Article
                8423
                10.1007/s00405-023-08423-w
                10942922
                38217726
                71a30b48-cff1-4d6b-b1c2-c8280f8a583f
                © The Author(s) 2024

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 2 September 2023
                : 18 December 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: Ege University
                Categories
                Miscellaneous
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024

                Otolaryngology
                artificial intelligence,chatbot,chatgpt,ent,uptodate,otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article