ArticleDigital health
Changes in patient perceptions regarding ChatGPT-written explanations on lifestyle modifications for preventing urolithiasis recurrence.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence and ChatGPT in Abdominopelvic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Applications and Impact.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Pooled it
- AI-Assisted Decision-Making for End-Stage Organ Failure: Opportunities and Ethical Concerns.Artificial organs · 2026Review
- Accuracy of large language models in answering urological questions on lower urinary tract symptoms: comparison with the EAU 2025 guidelines.Central European journal of urology · 2026Article
- Mapping applications and evaluations of LLM-enabled AI chatbots for health purposes: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Changes in public perception of artificial intelligence in healthcare after exposure to ChatGPT.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Large language model chatbots for patient education in kidney stones: a scoping review.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Health Consumers' Use and Perceptions of Health Information from Generative Artificial Intelligence Chatbots: A Scoping Review.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Clinical Performance and Communication Skills of ChatGPT Versus Physicians in Emergency Medicine: Simulated Patient Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- AI Chatbots as Sources of STD Information: A Study on Reliability and Readability.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding stone formation and recurrence among urolithiasis patients: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- ChatGPT as a Clinical Decision Maker for Urolithiasis: Compliance with the Current European Association of Urology Guidelines.European urology open science · 2024Review
- "Doctor ChatGPT, Can You Help Me?" The Patient's Perspective: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Artificial Intelligence (AI) imitating human-like language, such as ChatGPT, has impacted lives throughout various multidisciplinary fields. However, despite these innovations, it is unclear how well its implementation will assist patients in clinical situations. We evaluated changes in patient perceptions regarding AI before and after reading a ChatGPT-written explanation. Materials and methods: In total, 24 South Korean patients receiving urolithiasis treatment were surveyed through questionnaires. The ChatGPT explanatory note was provided between the first and second questionnaires, detailing lifestyle modifications for preventing urolithiasis recurrence. The study questionnaire was the Korean version of the General Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence Scale, including positive and negative attitude items. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were accomplished to compare questionnaire scores before and after receiving the explanatory note. A linear regression analysis with stepwise elimination was used to assess variable (demographic data) accuracy in predicting outcomes. Results: There were significant differences between total negative questionnaire scores pre- and post-surveys of ChatGPT, but not in the positive scores. Among variables, only education level significantly influenced mean score differences in the negative questionnaires. Conclusions: The negative perception change among urolithiasis patients after receiving the explanatory note provided by the AI chatbot program was observed, evidencing that patients with lower education levels expressed a more negative response. The explanatory note provided by the AI chatbot program could provoke an adverse change in AI perception. Negative human responses must be considered to improve and adapt new technology in health care. Only through changing patient perspectives will upgraded AI technology integrate into medical healthcare.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.