Abstract
Background and aims We aimed to assess the accuracy, completeness, and consistency of ChatGPT’s responses to frequently asked questions concerning the management and care of patients receiving endoscopic procedures and to compare its performance to Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4) in providing emotional support.
Methods Frequently asked questions (N = 117) about esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) were collected from professional societies, institutions, and social media. ChatGPT’s responses were generated and graded by board-certified gastroenterologists and advanced endoscopists. Emotional support questions were assessed by a psychiatrist.
Results ChatGPT demonstrated high accuracy in answering questions about EGD (94.8% comprehensive or correct but insufficient), colonoscopy (100% comprehensive or correct but insufficient), ERCP (91% comprehensive or correct but insufficient), and EUS (87% comprehensive or correct but insufficient). No answers were deemed entirely incorrect (0%). Reproducibility was significant across all categories. ChatGPT’s emotional support performance was inferior to the newer GPT-4 model.
Conclusion ChatGPT provides accurate and consistent responses to patient questions about common endoscopic procedures and demonstrates potential as a supplementary information resource for patients and healthcare providers.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflicts of interest/ Disclosures: The authors certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest. The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Ethical statement: Institutional IRB approval was not obtained for this study as this study does not use any human subjects.
Patient Consent Statement: Not applicable
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
