Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37698703›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2024

Validity and reliability of an instrument evaluating the performance of intelligent chatbot: the Artificial Intelligence Performance Instrument (AIPI).

Jerome R Lechien, Antonino Maniaci, Isabelle Gengler, Stephane Hans, Carlos M Chiesa-Estomba, Luigi A Vaira

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clinical decision support using large language models in otolaryngology: a systematic review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. "MELMA" in otolaryngology: Medical evaluation of large language model answers. Clinician-rated scoring (MELMA-Q) and web-based auditing (MELMA-W) novel tools for AI assessment.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Comparative evaluation of four large language models (ChatGPT-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Sonnet-4, and DeepSeek-R1) for diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making in real-world otolaryngology scenarios.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  8. Assessing ChatGPT Responses to Commonly Asked Questions About Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2026
    Article
  9. Evaluation of ChatGPT-4o as a text-based clinical decision support tool for junior otolaryngology residents: A randomized controlled trial.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  10. Evaluation of ChatGPT-4o as a text-based clinical decision support tool for junior otolaryngology residents: A randomized controlled trial.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 5 institutions in 6 countries.

Jerome R Lechien *Research Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (IFOS), Paris, France. Jerome.Lechien@umons.ac.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0845-0845
Antonino Maniaci *Research Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (IFOS), Paris, France.
Isabelle GenglerResearch Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (IFOS), Paris, France.
Stephane HansResearch Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (IFOS), Paris, France.
Carlos M Chiesa-Estomba *Research Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (IFOS), Paris, France.
Luigi A Vaira *Research Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (IFOS), Paris, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRBiogipuzkoa Health Research Institute · ESUniversity of Catania · ITUniversity of Cincinnati · USUniversity of Sassari · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the reliability and validity of the Artificial Intelligence Performance Instrument (AIPI).

methodsMedical records of patients consulting in otolaryngology were evaluated by physicians and ChatGPT for differential diagnosis, management, and treatment. The ChatGPT performance was rated twice using AIPI within a 7-day period to assess test-retest reliability. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's α. Internal validity was evaluated by comparing the AIPI scores of the clinical cases rated by ChatGPT and 2 blinded practitioners. Convergent validity was measured by comparing the AIPI score with a modified version of the Ottawa Clinical Assessment Tool (OCAT). Interrater reliability was assessed using Kendall's tau.

resultsForty-five patients completed the evaluations (28 females). The AIPI Cronbach's alpha analysis suggested an adequate internal consistency (α = 0.754). The test-retest reliability was moderate-to-strong for items and the total score of AIPI (r

conclusionsAIPI is a valid and reliable instrument in assessing the performance of ChatGPT in ear, nose and throat conditions. Future studies are needed to investigate the usefulness of AIPI in medicine and surgery, and to evaluate the psychometric properties in these fields.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceFemaleHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesArtificialChatbotChatGPTComparisonDiagnosisGPTHead neckInstrumentIntelligenceMedicineOtolaryngologyPerformanceSurgeryToolTreatment

Identifiers

PMID37698703
OpenAlexW4386624025

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.