ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2023
AI's deep dive into complex pediatric inguinal hernia issues: a challenge to traditional guidelines?
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Large Language Models for Chatbot Health Advice Studies: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence and ChatGPT in Abdominopelvic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Applications and Impact.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Pooled it
- Application of machine learning and deep learning in the diagnosis and treatment of inguinal hernia: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluating evidence-based health information from generative AI using a cross-sectional study with laypeople seeking screening information.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study utilized ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence program based on large language models, to explore controversial issues in pediatric inguinal hernia surgery and compare its responses with the guidelines of the European Association of Pediatric Surgeons (EUPSA).
methodsSix contentious issues raised by EUPSA were submitted to ChatGPT 4.0 for analysis, for which two independent responses were generated for each issue. These generated answers were subsequently compared with systematic reviews and guidelines. To ensure content accuracy and reliability, a content analysis was conducted, and expert evaluations were solicited for validation. Content analysis evaluated the consistency or discrepancy between ChatGPT 4.0's responses and the guidelines. An expert scoring method assess the quality, reliability, and applicability of responses. The TF-IDF model tested the stability and consistency of the two responses.
resultsThe responses generated by ChatGPT 4.0 were mostly consistent with the guidelines. However, some differences and contradictions were noted. The average quality score was 3.33, reliability score was 2.75, and applicability score was 3.46 (out of 5). The average similarity between the two responses was 0.72 (out of 1), Content analysis and expert ratings yielded consistent conclusions, enhancing the credibility of our research.
conclusionChatGPT can provide valuable responses to clinical questions, but it has limitations and requires further improvement. It is recommended to combine ChatGPT with other reliable data sources to improve clinical practice and decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37843604What 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.