Large-Language Models in Orthodontics: Assessing Reliability and Validity of ChatGPT in Pretreatment Patient Education.

Autor:	Vassis S; Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry and Oral Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, DNK., Powell H; Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry and Oral Health, Aarhus Universiy, Aarhus, DNK., Petersen E; Department of Dentistry and Oral Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, DNK., Barkmann A; Department of Dentistry and Oral Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, DNK., Noeldeke B; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, DNK., Kristensen KD; Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry and Oral Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, DNK., Stoustrup P; Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry and Oral Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, DNK.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Cureus [Cureus] 2024 Aug 29; Vol. 16 (8), pp. e68085. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Aug 29 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI:	10.7759/cureus.68085
Abstrakt:	Background: Patients seeking orthodontic treatment may use large language models (LLMs) such as Chat-GPT for self-education, thereby impacting their decision-making process. This study assesses the reliability and validity of Chat-GPT prompts aimed at informing patients about orthodontic side effects and examines patients' perceptions of this information. Materials and Methods: To assess reliability, n = 28 individuals were asked to generate information from GPT-3.5 and Generative Pretrained Transformer 4 (GPT-4) about side effects related to orthodontic treatment using both self-formulated and standardized prompts. Three experts evaluated the content generated based on these prompts regarding its validity. We asked a cohort of 46 orthodontic patients about their perceptions after reading an AI-generated information text about orthodontic side effects and compared it with the standard text from the postgraduate orthodontic program at Aarhus University. Results: Although the GPT-generated answers mentioned several relevant side effects, the replies were diverse. The experts rated the AI-generated content generally as "neither deficient nor satisfactory," with GPT-4 achieving higher scores than GPT-3.5. The patients perceived the GPT-generated information as more useful and more comprehensive and experienced less nervousness when reading the GPT-generated information. Nearly 80% of patients preferred the AI-generated information over the standard text. Conclusions: Although patients generally prefer AI-generated information regarding the side effects of orthodontic treatment, the tested prompts fall short of providing thoroughly satisfactory and high-quality education to patients. Competing Interests: Human subjects: Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. - issued approval -. We do not need an ethical approval for this kind of study based on questionnaires by Danish regulations. The participants just need to sign and informed consent which they have done prior to enrollment. This is according to Danish regulations on patient-questionnaire research. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. (Copyright © 2024, Vassis et al.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu