Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37658948›Full record

ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2024

Evaluating the performance of ChatGPT in answering questions related to urolithiasis.

Hakan Cakir, Ufuk Caglar, Oguzhan Yildiz, Arda Meric, Ali Ayranci, Faruk Ozgor

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urology and nephrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Evaluation of ChatGPT's performance on answering pediatric urology questions based on association guidelines.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Evaluation of ChatGPT-4oUrolithiasis · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. ChatGPT's competence in responding to urological emergencies.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2025
    Article
  14. Analyzing the performance of ChatGPT in answering inquiries about cervical cancer.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hakan CakirDepartment of Urology, Fulya Acibadem Hospital, Sisli, Istanbul, Turkey. hakancakirmd@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-7341-8360
Ufuk CaglarDepartment of Urology, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Oguzhan YildizDepartment of Urology, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Arda MericDepartment of Urology, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ali AyranciDepartment of Urology, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Faruk OzgorDepartment of Urology, Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Haseki Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi · TRAcıbadem University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) program with natural language processing. We analyzed ChatGPT's knowledge about urolithiasis whether it can be used to inform patients about urolithiasis.

methodsFrequently asked questions (FAQs) about urolithiasis on the websites of urological associations and hospitals were analyzed. Also, strong recommendation-level information was gathered from the urolithiasis section of the European Association of Urology (EAU) 2022 Guidelines. All questions were asked in order in ChatGPT August 3rd version. All answers were evaluated separately by two specialist urologists and scored between 1 and 4, where 1: completely correct, 2: correct but inadequate, 3: a mix of correct and misleading information, and 4: completely incorrect.

resultsOf the FAQs, 94.6% were answered completely correctly. No question was answered completely incorrectly. All questions about general, diagnosis, and ureteral stones were graded as 1. Of the 60 questions prepared according to the EAU guideline recommendations, 50 (83.3%) were evaluated as grade 1, and 8 (13.3%) and 2 (3.3%) as grade 3. All questions related to general, diagnostic, renal calculi, ureteral calculi, and metabolic evaluation received the same answer the second time they were asked.

conclusionOur findings demonstrated that ChatGPT accurately and satisfactorily answered more than 95% of the questions about urolithiasis. We conclude that applying ChatGPT in urology clinics under the supervision of urologists can help patients and their families to have better understanding on urolithiasis diagnosis and treatment.

Indexed as

Kidney CalculiUreteral CalculiUrolithiasisArtificial IntelligenceHospitalsHumansArtificial intelligenceChatGPTPatient knowledgeUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID37658948
OpenAlexW4386392833

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.