Concordance of ChatGPT With American Burn Association Guidelines on Acute Burns.
Journal
Annals of plastic surgery
ISSN: 1536-3708
Titre abrégé: Ann Plast Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7805336
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Nov 2024
01 Nov 2024
Historique:
medline:
24
10
2024
pubmed:
24
10
2024
entrez:
24
10
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Burn injuries often require immediate assistance and specialized care for optimal management and outcomes. The emergence of accessible artificial intelligence technology has just recently started being applied to healthcare decision making and patient education. However, its role in clinical recommendations is still under scrutiny. This study aims to evaluate ChatGPT's outputs and the appropriateness of its responses to commonly asked questions regarding acute burn care when compared to the American Burn Association Guidelines. Twelve commonly asked questions were formulated by a fellowship-trained burn surgeon to address the American Burn Association's recommendations on burn injuries, management, and patient referral. These questions were prompted into ChatGPT, and each response was compared with the aforementioned guidelines, the gold standard for accurate and evidence-based burn care recommendations. Three burn surgeons independently evaluated the appropriateness and comprehensiveness of each ChatGPT response based on the guidelines according to the modified Global Quality Score scale. The average score for ChatGPT-generated responses was 4.56 ± 0.65, indicating the responses were exceptional quality with the most important topics covered and in high concordance with the guidelines. This initial comparison of ChatGPT-generated responses and the American Burn Association guidelines demonstrates that ChatGPT can accurately and comprehensibly describe appropriate treatment and management plans for acute burn injuries. We foresee that ChatGPT may play a role as a complementary tool in medical decision making and patient education, having a profound impact on clinical practice, research, and education.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39445876
doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000004128
pii: 00000637-202411000-00006
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
564-574Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared.
Références
Guldogan CE, Kendirci M, Gundogdu E, et al. Analysis of factors associated with mortality in major burn patients. Turk J Surg. 2019;35:155–164.
Mason SA, Nathens AB, Byrne JP, et al. Increased rate of long-term mortality among burn survivors: a population-based matched cohort study. Ann Surg. 2019;269:1192–1199.
Monstrey S, Hoeksema H, Verbelen J, et al. Assessment of burn depth and burn wound healing potential. Burns. 2008;34:761–769.
Shupp JW, Nasabzadeh TJ, Rosenthal DS, et al. A review of the local pathophysiologic bases of burn wound progression. J Burn Care Res. 2010;31:849–873.
Alessandri Bonetti M, Giorgino R, Gallo Afflitto G, et al. How does ChatGPT perform on the Italian Residency Admission National Exam compared to 15,869 medical graduates? Ann Biomed Eng. 2024;52:745–749.
Alessandri-Bonetti M, Liu HY, Giorgino R, et al. The first months of life of ChatGPT and its impact in healthcare: a bibliometric analysis of the current literature. Ann Biomed Eng. 2024;52:1107–1110.
De Fauw J, Ledsam JR, Romera-Paredes B, et al. Clinically applicable deep learning for diagnosis and referral in retinal disease. Nat Med. 2018;24:1342–1350.
McKinney SM, Sieniek M, Godbole V, et al. International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening. Nature. 2020;577:89–94.
Webb JJ. Proof of concept: using ChatGPT to teach emergency physicians how to break bad news. Cureus. 2023;15:e38755.
Jeong T, Liu H, Alessandri-Bonetti M, et al. Revolutionizing patient education: ChatGPT outperforms Google in answering patient queries on free flap reconstruction. Microsurgery. 2023;43:752–761.
Liu HY, Alessandri Bonetti M, Jeong T, et al. Dr. ChatGPT will see you now: how do Google and ChatGPT compare in answering patient questions on breast reconstruction? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2023;85:488–497.
Johnson KB, Wei WQ, Weeraratne D, et al. Precision medicine, AI, and the future of personalized health care. Clin Transl Sci. 2021;14:86–93.
Davenport T, Kalakota R. The potential for artificial intelligence in healthcare. Future Healthc J. 2019;6:94–98.
Dave T, Athaluri SA, Singh S. ChatGPT in medicine: an overview of its applications, advantages, limitations, future prospects, and ethical considerations. Front Artif Intell. 2023;6:1169595.
Salvagno M, Taccone FS, Gerli AG. Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? Crit Care. 2023;27:75.
The Lancet Digital Health. ChatGPT: friend or foe? Lancet Digit Health. 2023;5:e102.
Hu K. ChatGPT sets record for fastest-growing user base - analyst note. Thomson Reuters. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/technology/chatgpt-sets-record-fastest-growing-user-base-analyst-note-2023-02-01/. Accessed February 02, 2023.
Liu HY, Alessandri-Bonetti M, Arellano JA, et al. Can ChatGPT be the plastic surgeon's new digital assistant? A bibliometric analysis and scoping review of ChatGPT in plastic surgery literature. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2024;48:1644–1652.
Lee P, Bubeck S, Petro J. Benefits, limits, and risks of GPT-4 as an AI Chatbot for medicine. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:1233–1239.
Bettencourt AP, Romanowski KS, Joe V, et al. Updating the burn center referral criteria: results from the 2018 eDelphi consensus study. J Burn Care Res. 2020;41:1052–1062.
Bernard A, Langille M, Hughes S, et al. A systematic review of patient inflammatory bowel disease information resources on the World Wide Web. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:2070–2077.
Norbury W, Herndon DN, Tanksley J, et al. Infection in burns. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2016;17:250–255.
Ong YS, Samuel M, Song C. Meta-analysis of early excision of burns. Burns. 2006;32:145–150.
Khan RA, Jawaid M, Khan AR, et al. ChatGPT - reshaping medical education and clinical management. Pak J Med Sci. 2023;39:605–607.
Patel SB, Lam K. ChatGPT: the future of discharge summaries? Lancet Digit Health. 2023;5:e107–e108.
Rao A, Kim J, Kamineni M, et al. Evaluating ChatGPT as an adjunct for radiologic decision-making. medRxiv [Preprint]. 2023;2023.02.02.23285399. doi:10.1101/2023.02.02.23285399.
doi: 10.1101/2023.02.02.23285399
Holzinger A, Keiblinger K, Holub P, et al. AI for life: trends in artificial intelligence for biotechnology. N Biotechnol. 2023;74:16–24.
Peck M, Molnar J, Swart D. A global plan for burn prevention and care. Bull World Health Organ. 2009;87:802–803.
Klein MB, Kramer CB, Nelson J, et al. Geographic access to burn center hospitals. JAMA. 2009;302:1774–1781.
Sanmarchi F, Bucci A, Nuzzolese AG, et al. A step-by-step researcher's guide to the use of an AI-based transformer in epidemiology: an exploratory analysis of ChatGPT using the STROBE checklist for observational studies. Z Gesundh Wiss. 2023;32:1–36. doi:10.1007/s10389-023-01936-y.
doi: 10.1007/s10389-023-01936-y
Brown T, Mann B, Ryder N, et al. Language models are few-shot learners. Adv Neural Inform Proc Syst. 2020;33:1877–1901.
Bhandari PL, Drolet BC, James AJ, et al. Artificial intelligence and submissions to Annals of Plastic Surgery. Ann Plast Surg. 2024;92:487–488.
Cascella M, Montomoli J, Bellini V, et al. Evaluating the feasibility of ChatGPT in healthcare: an analysis of multiple clinical and research scenarios. J Med Syst. 2023;47:33.
Ravipati A, Pradeep T, Elman SA. The role of artificial intelligence in dermatology: the promising but limited accuracy of ChatGPT in diagnosing clinical scenarios. Int J Dermatol. 2023;62:e547–e548.
Naik N, Hameed BMZ, Shetty DK, et al. Legal and ethical consideration in artificial intelligence in healthcare: who takes responsibility? Front Surg. 2022;9:862322.