Evaluating AI-Generated informed consent documents in oral surgery: A comparative study of ChatGPT-4, Bard gemini advanced, and human-written consents

This study evaluates the quality and readability of informed consent documents generated by AI platforms ChatGPT-4 and Bard Gemini Advanced compared to those written by a first-year oral surgery resident for common oral surgery procedures. The evaluation, conducted by 18 experienced oral and maxillofacial surgeons, assessed consents for accuracy, completeness, readability, and overall quality. ChatGPT-4 consistently outperformed both Bard and human-written consents. ChatGPT-4 consents had a median accuracy score of 4 [IQR 4-4], compared to Bard's 3 [IQR 3-4] and human's 4 [IQR 3-4]. Completeness scores were higher for ChatGPT-4 (4 [IQR 4-5]) than Bard (3 [IQR 3-4]) and human (4 [IQR 3-4]). Readability was also superior for ChatGPT-4, with a median score of 4 [IQR 4-5] compared to Bard and human consents, both at 4 [IQR 4-4] and 4 [IQR 3-4], respectively. The Gunning Fog Index for ChatGPT-4 was 17.2 [IQR 16.5-18.2], better than Bard's 23.1 [IQR 20.5-24.7] and the human consents' 20 [IQR 19.2-20.9]. Overall, ChatGPT-4's consents received the highest quality ratings, underscoring AI's potential in enhancing patient communication and the informed consent process. The study suggests AI can reduce misinformation risks and improve patient understanding, but continuous evaluation, oversight, and patient feedback integration are crucial to ensure the effectiveness and appropriateness of AI-generated content in clinical practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Published
2024-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2024.10.002
Citations
27
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.25

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating AI-Generated informed consent documents in oral surgery: A comparative study of ChatGPT-4, Bard gemini advanced, and human-written consents

Guido Gabriele, Fabiana Allevi, Vincenzo Abbate, Giovanni Salzano et al.
27 citations
Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
3.25
article

Evaluating AI-Generated informed consent documents in oral surgery: A comparative study of ChatGPT-4, Bard gemini advanced, and human-written consents

Guido Gabriele, Fabiana Allevi, Vincenzo Abbate, Giovanni Salzano, Alberto Maria Saibene, Andrea Frosolini, Resi Pucci, Fabio Maglitto, Stefania Troise, Marzia Petrocelli, Luigi Angelo Vaira, Antonino Maniaci, Antonio Arena, Salvatore Crimi, Giacomo De Riu, Valentino Vellone, Michela Bergonzani, Giada Anna Beltramini, Luigi Orrù, Jerome Rene Lechien, Paolo Boscolo‐Rizzo, Alessandro Tel, Carlos M. Chiesa‐Estomba, Alessandro Bolzoni, Miguel Mayo‐Yáñez, Giuseppe Tanda
article en
27 citations

Abstract

This study evaluates the quality and readability of informed consent documents generated by AI platforms ChatGPT-4 and Bard Gemini Advanced compared to those written by a first-year oral surgery resident for common oral surgery procedures. The evaluation, conducted by 18 experienced oral and maxillofacial surgeons, assessed consents for accuracy, completeness, readability, and overall quality. ChatGPT-4 consistently outperformed both Bard and human-written consents. ChatGPT-4 consents had a median accuracy score of 4 [IQR 4-4], compared to Bard's 3 [IQR 3-4] and human's 4 [IQR 3-4]. Completeness scores were higher for ChatGPT-4 (4 [IQR 4-5]) than Bard (3 [IQR 3-4]) and human (4 [IQR 3-4]). Readability was also superior for ChatGPT-4, with a median score of 4 [IQR 4-5] compared to Bard and human consents, both at 4 [IQR 4-4] and 4 [IQR 3-4], respectively. The Gunning Fog Index for ChatGPT-4 was 17.2 [IQR 16.5-18.2], better than Bard's 23.1 [IQR 20.5-24.7] and the human consents' 20 [IQR 19.2-20.9]. Overall, ChatGPT-4's consents received the highest quality ratings, underscoring AI's potential in enhancing patient communication and the informed consent process. The study suggests AI can reduce misinformation risks and improve patient understanding, but continuous evaluation, oversight, and patient feedback integration are crucial to ensure the effectiveness and appropriateness of AI-generated content in clinical practice.

Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial SurgeryVol. 53(1)
University of Siena (IT), University of Parma (IT), University of Udine (IT), University of Mons (BE), University of Trieste (IT), University of Sassari (IT), University of Milan (IT), Università degli Studi di Enna Kore (IT), Santa Maria Nuova Hospital (IT), Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico (IT), University of Catania (IT), Biogipuzkoa Health Research Institute (ES), Ospedale San Paolo (IT), Complexo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña (ES), Carlo Forlanini Hospital (IT), University of Bari Aldo Moro (IT), University of Naples Federico II (IT)
Università degli Studi di Sassari
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
3.25
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.