This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
ChatGPT, a generative artificial intelligence model, can provide useful and reliable responses in the field of ophthalmology, comparable to those of medical professionals. Twelve frequently asked questions from ophthalmology patients were selected, and responses were generated both in the role of an expert user and a non-expert user. The responses were evaluated by ophthalmologists using three scales: Global Quality Score (GQS), Reliability Score (RS), and Usefulness Score (US), and analyzed statistically through descriptive study, association, and comparison. The results indicate that there are no significant differences between the responses of expert and non-expert users, although the responses from the expert user tend to be slightly better rated. ChatGPT’s responses proved to be reliable and useful, suggesting its potential as a complementary tool to enhance health literacy and alleviate the informational burden on healthcare professionals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ruíz-Núñez et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: