Scholarlink

Background <p>Intraoperative testing is a critical component of cochlear implant surgery. As AI tools like ChatGPT intersect with medical communication, it is important to assess their ability to handle highly specialized clinical content.</p> Objective <p>To evaluate ChatGPT-4’s capacity to generate accurate and expert-level responses in a specialized surgical domain by comparing its answers on intraoperative testing in cochlear implant (CI) surgery with statements from an international expert consensus.</p> Methods <p>Key questions and statements from the International Consensus on Intraoperative CI Testing were presented to GPT-4 twice. Two independent reviewers rated response similarity as high, medium, or low. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. GPT-4’s self-assessments were also collected.</p> Results <p>Of 24 questions, 54.2% of responses were rated highly similar, 33.3% moderately similar, and 12.5% low similarity. GPT-4 self-rated 33.3% as highly similar and 66.7% as moderate. Response reproducibility was 79.2%. Inter-reviewer agreement was almost&#xa0;perfect (κ = 0.86), while agreement between reviewers and GPT-4 was moderate (κ = 0.44).</p> Conclusion <p>GPT-4 demonstrates moderate alignment with expert consensus on cochlear implant testing but lacks the clinical depth required for autonomous decision-making. While it shows promise for supporting clinical communication, further refinement is needed in high-stakes surgical contexts.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

How consistent are artificial intelligence responses with cochlear implant guidelines?

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月13日

查看全文
  • Aysun Parlak Kocabay,
  • Özlem İçöz

摘要

Background

Intraoperative testing is a critical component of cochlear implant surgery. As AI tools like ChatGPT intersect with medical communication, it is important to assess their ability to handle highly specialized clinical content.

Objective

To evaluate ChatGPT-4’s capacity to generate accurate and expert-level responses in a specialized surgical domain by comparing its answers on intraoperative testing in cochlear implant (CI) surgery with statements from an international expert consensus.

Methods

Key questions and statements from the International Consensus on Intraoperative CI Testing were presented to GPT-4 twice. Two independent reviewers rated response similarity as high, medium, or low. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. GPT-4’s self-assessments were also collected.

Results

Of 24 questions, 54.2% of responses were rated highly similar, 33.3% moderately similar, and 12.5% low similarity. GPT-4 self-rated 33.3% as highly similar and 66.7% as moderate. Response reproducibility was 79.2%. Inter-reviewer agreement was almost perfect (κ = 0.86), while agreement between reviewers and GPT-4 was moderate (κ = 0.44).

Conclusion

GPT-4 demonstrates moderate alignment with expert consensus on cochlear implant testing but lacks the clinical depth required for autonomous decision-making. While it shows promise for supporting clinical communication, further refinement is needed in high-stakes surgical contexts.