ChatGPT for Tinnitus Information and Support: Response Accuracy and Retest after Three and Six Months

Author:

Jedrzejczak W. Wiktor1ORCID,Skarzynski Piotr H.234ORCID,Raj-Koziak Danuta5ORCID,Sanfins Milaine Dominici26ORCID,Hatzopoulos Stavros7ORCID,Kochanek Krzysztof1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Experimental Audiology, World Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, 05-830 Kajetany, Poland

2. Department of Teleaudiology and Screening, World Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, 05-830 Kajetany, Poland

3. Institute of Sensory Organs, 05-830 Kajetany, Poland

4. Heart Failure and Cardiac Rehabilitation Department, Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, 03-242 Warsaw, Poland

5. Tinnitus Department, World Hearing Center, Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, 05-830 Kajetany, Poland

6. Speech-Hearing-Language Department, Audiology Discipline, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo 04023062, Brazil

7. ENT and Audiology Unit, Department of Neurosciences and Rehabilitation, University of Ferrara, 44121 Ferrara, Italy

Abstract

Testing of ChatGPT has recently been performed over a diverse range of topics. However, most of these assessments have been based on broad domains of knowledge. Here, we test ChatGPT’s knowledge of tinnitus, an important but specialized aspect of audiology and otolaryngology. Testing involved evaluating ChatGPT’s answers to a defined set of 10 questions on tinnitus. Furthermore, given the technology is advancing quickly, we re-evaluated the responses to the same 10 questions 3 and 6 months later. The accuracy of the responses was rated by 6 experts (the authors) using a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. Most of ChatGPT’s responses were rated as satisfactory or better. However, we did detect a few instances where the responses were not accurate and might be considered somewhat misleading. Over the first 3 months, the ratings generally improved, but there was no more significant improvement at 6 months. In our judgment, ChatGPT provided unexpectedly good responses, given that the questions were quite specific. Although no potentially harmful errors were identified, some mistakes could be seen as somewhat misleading. ChatGPT shows great potential if further developed by experts in specific areas, but for now, it is not yet ready for serious application.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Reference46 articles.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3