Artificial Intelligence Chatbots' Understanding of the Risks and Benefits of Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scenarios

被引:3
|
作者
Patil, Nikhil S. [1 ]
Huang, Ryan S. [2 ]
Caterine, Scott [3 ]
Yao, Jason [3 ]
Larocque, Natasha [3 ]
van der Pol, Christian B. [3 ]
Stubbs, Euan [3 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Michael G DeGroote Sch Med, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Temerty Fac Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] McMaster Univ, Dept Radiol, Hamilton, ON, Canada
来源
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF RADIOLOGISTS JOURNAL-JOURNAL DE L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES RADIOLOGISTES | 2024年 / 75卷 / 03期
关键词
ChatGPT; Bard; Google; contrast; risks; MRI; CT; CONTRAST AGENTS;
D O I
10.1177/08465371231220561
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: Patients may seek online information to better understand medical imaging procedures. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of information provided by 2 popular artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots pertaining to common imaging scenarios' risks, benefits, and alternatives. Methods: Fourteen imaging-related scenarios pertaining to computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were used. Factors including the use of intravenous contrast, the presence of renal disease, and whether the patient was pregnant were included in the analysis. For each scenario, 3 prompts for outlining the (1) risks, (2) benefits, and (3) alternative imaging choices or potential implications of not using contrast were inputted into ChatGPT and Bard. A grading rubric and a 5-point Likert scale was used by 2 independent reviewers to grade responses. Prompt variability and chatbot context dependency were also assessed. Results: ChatGPT's performance was superior to Bard's in accurately responding to prompts per Likert grading (4.36 +/- 0.63 vs 3.25 +/- 1.03 seconds, P < .0001). There was substantial agreement between independent reviewer grading for ChatGPT (kappa = 0.621) and Bard (kappa = 0.684). Response text length was not statistically different between ChatGPT and Bard (2087 +/- 256 characters vs 2162 +/- 369 characters, P = .24). Response time was longer for ChatGPT (34 +/- 2 vs 8 +/- 1 seconds, P < .0001). Conclusions: ChatGPT performed superior to Bard at outlining risks, benefits, and alternatives to common imaging scenarios. Generally, context dependency and prompt variability did not change chatbot response content. Due to the lack of detailed scientific reasoning and inability to provide patient-specific information, both AI chatbots have limitations as a patient information resource.
引用
收藏
页码:518 / 524
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging findings in dogs with vaginal leiomyoma and leiomyosarcoma
    Tanaka, Toshiyuki
    Noguchi, Shunsuke
    Wada, Yusuke
    Yamazaki, Hiroki
    Nishida, Hidetaka
    Akiyoshi, Hideo
    VETERINARY MEDICINE AND SCIENCE, 2022, 8 (06) : 2337 - 2344
  • [42] Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography appearance of chronic subdural haematoma in a dog
    Kitagawa, M.
    Okada, M.
    Koie, H.
    Kanayama, K.
    Sakai, T.
    AUSTRALIAN VETERINARY JOURNAL, 2008, 86 (03) : 100 - 101
  • [43] Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of the dromedary camel distal limbs
    El Nahas, Ayman
    Almohamad, Zakriya
    Hagag, Usama
    BMC VETERINARY RESEARCH, 2024, 20 (01)
  • [44] Ultrasound-guided image fusion with computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging
    Clevert, D. -A.
    Helck, A.
    Paprottka, P. M.
    Zengel, P.
    Trumm, C.
    Reiser, M. F.
    RADIOLOGE, 2012, 52 (01): : 63 - 69
  • [45] Imaging abusive head trauma: why use both computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging?
    Elida Vázquez
    Ignacio Delgado
    Angel Sánchez-Montañez
    Anna Fábrega
    Paola Cano
    Nieves Martín
    Pediatric Radiology, 2014, 44 : 589 - 603
  • [46] Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of lesions at masticator space
    Razek, Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel
    JAPANESE JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2014, 32 (03) : 123 - 137
  • [47] Brain Imaging in Patients with Transient Ischemic Attack: A Comparison of Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Foerster, A.
    Gass, A.
    Kern, R.
    Ay, H.
    Chatzikonstantinou, A.
    Hennerici, M. G.
    Szabo, K.
    EUROPEAN NEUROLOGY, 2012, 67 (03) : 136 - 141
  • [48] Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of hydatid disease: A pictorial review of uncommon imaging presentations
    Abbasi, Bita
    Akhavan, Reza
    Khameneh, Afshar Ghamari
    Amirkhiz, Gisoo Darban Hosseini
    Rezaei-Dalouei, Hossein
    Tayebi, Shamim
    Hashemi, Jahanbakhsh
    Aminizadeh, Behzad
    Amirkhiz, Sanam Darban Hosseini
    HELIYON, 2021, 7 (05)
  • [49] Thoracic calcifications on magnetic resonance imaging: correlations with computed tomography
    Zampieri, Juliana Fischman
    Pacini, Gabriel Sartori
    Zanon, Matheus
    Leonhardt Altmayer, Stephan Philip
    Watte, Guilherme
    Barros, Marcelo
    Durayski, Evandra
    Portes Meirelles, Gustavo de Souza
    Guimaraes, Marcos Duarte
    Marchiori, Edson
    Souza Junior, Arthur Soares
    Hochhegger, Bruno
    JORNAL BRASILEIRO DE PNEUMOLOGIA, 2019, 45 (04)
  • [50] Recommendations for additional magnetic resonance imaging in abdominal computed tomography
    Kuo, Yu
    Lee, Kang-Lung
    Chen, Yi-Lun
    Weng, Ching-Yao
    Chang, Feng-Chi
    Chen, Tzeng-Ji
    Wu, Hsiu-Mei
    Wu, Chia-Hung
    JOURNAL OF THE CHINESE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2023, 86 (02) : 240 - 245