External Validation of the EAU Guidelines Bot for Urethral Stricture: Accuracy, Completeness, and Clarity Analysis

Background/Objectives: Recently the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines presented the EAU Guidelines bot to assist urologists in the reading of the guidelines; however, there is a lack of up-to-date external validation. The aim of our study is to assess the accuracy, completeness, and clarity of the guidelines bot in urethral strictures. Methods: A total of 117 questions based on the EAU urethral strictures guidelines recommendations were developed. Each question was input to the EAU guidelines bot and the response was assessed by two expert urologists to assess the accuracy, completeness, and clarity. Moreover, 10 simple clinical cases were input. A 5-point Likert scale was used as a score and, in case of discrepancies, a third urologist was queried. Accuracy, completeness and clarity were assessed per chapter and per grade of recommendation. All questions and answers were recorded in an Excel file. Results: Overall 117 questions were developed. In terms of accuracy, 111/117 (95%) were defined as accurate (scores 4–5), 4/117 (3%) presented a fair accuracy (score 3), and 2/117 (2%) were deemed not accurate. In terms of completeness, 93/117 (80%) were defined as complete (scores 4–5), 22/117 (19%) presented a fair completeness (score 3), and 2/117 (2%) were deemed not complete. Finally, in terms of clarity, 104/117 (89%) were defined as clear (scores 4–5), 13/117 (11%) presented a fair clarity (score 3), and 0/109 (0%) were deemed not clear. When comparing strong and weak recommendations, no differences were recorded. Overall the answers to simple clinical cases were in line with the guidelines with good accuracy, completeness and clarity scores. Conclusions: The EAU guidelines bot represents an accurate tool for urethral stenosis guidelines. Some fine-tuning is needed to improve readability and clarity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Société Internationale d’Urologie Journal
Published
2026-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/siuj7020030
Primary Topic
Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

External Validation of the EAU Guidelines Bot for Urethral Stricture: Accuracy, Completeness, and Clarity Analysis

Giacomo Gallo, Alessandro Sciarra, Pietro Spatafora, Sergio Serni et al.
Société Internationale d’Urologie Journal
Clinical practice guidelines implementation
article

External Validation of the EAU Guidelines Bot for Urethral Stricture: Accuracy, Completeness, and Clarity Analysis

Giacomo Gallo, Alessandro Sciarra, Pietro Spatafora, Sergio Serni, Manfredi Bruno Sequi, Sabrina De Cillis, Eleonora Rosato, Andrea Tubaro, Valerio Santarelli, Giorgia Tema, Riccardo Lombardo, Cosimo De Nunzio, Dr Enrico Checcucci, Francesco Del Giudice, Marta Santioni, Mauro Gacci, Mauro Ragonese, Daniele Amparore, Antonio Luigi Pastore, Matteo Romagnoli, Antonio Franco, Bernardo Rocco, Vincenzo Pagliarulo, Cristian Fiori, Enrico Finazzi Agrò, Nazario Foschi
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Recently the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines presented the EAU Guidelines bot to assist urologists in the reading of the guidelines; however, there is a lack of up-to-date external validation. The aim of our study is to assess the accuracy, completeness, and clarity of the guidelines bot in urethral strictures. Methods: A total of 117 questions based on the EAU urethral strictures guidelines recommendations were developed. Each question was input to the EAU guidelines bot and the response was assessed by two expert urologists to assess the accuracy, completeness, and clarity. Moreover, 10 simple clinical cases were input. A 5-point Likert scale was used as a score and, in case of discrepancies, a third urologist was queried. Accuracy, completeness and clarity were assessed per chapter and per grade of recommendation. All questions and answers were recorded in an Excel file. Results: Overall 117 questions were developed. In terms of accuracy, 111/117 (95%) were defined as accurate (scores 4–5), 4/117 (3%) presented a fair accuracy (score 3), and 2/117 (2%) were deemed not accurate. In terms of completeness, 93/117 (80%) were defined as complete (scores 4–5), 22/117 (19%) presented a fair completeness (score 3), and 2/117 (2%) were deemed not complete. Finally, in terms of clarity, 104/117 (89%) were defined as clear (scores 4–5), 13/117 (11%) presented a fair clarity (score 3), and 0/109 (0%) were deemed not clear. When comparing strong and weak recommendations, no differences were recorded. Overall the answers to simple clinical cases were in line with the guidelines with good accuracy, completeness and clarity scores. Conclusions: The EAU guidelines bot represents an accurate tool for urethral stenosis guidelines. Some fine-tuning is needed to improve readability and clarity.

Société Internationale d’Urologie JournalVol. 7(2)
University of Rome Tor Vergata (IT), Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IT), Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi (IT), Ospedale Vito Fazzi (IT), University of Turin (IT), Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
Clean water and sanitation
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Clinical practice guidelines implementation
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.