Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37874336›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

ChatGPT performance in laryngology and head and neck surgery: a clinical case-series.

Jerome R Lechien, Bianca M Georgescu, Stephane Hans, Carlos M Chiesa-Estomba

Abstract 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 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  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. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. 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
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Comparative diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT models in salivary gland disease: a multimodal vignette-based evaluation.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
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Quality of Information Provided by Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Surrounding the Reconstructive Surgery for Head and Neck Cancer: A Comparative Analysis Between ChatGPT4 and Claude2.Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Assessing the use of the novel tool Claude 3 in comparison to ChatGPT 4.0 as an artificial intelligence tool in the diagnosis and therapy of primary head and neck cancer cases.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
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Transforming ENT Healthcare: Advancements and Implications of Artificial Intelligence.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2024
    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

4 authors.

Jerome R LechienResearch Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Socities (IFOS), Paris, France. Jerome.Lechien@umons.ac.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0845-0845
Bianca M GeorgescuDivision of Laryngology and Broncho-Esophagology, Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, UMONS Research Institute for Health Sciences and Technology, EpiCURA Hospital, University of Mons (UMons), Mons, Belgium.
Stephane HansResearch Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Socities (IFOS), Paris, France.
Carlos M Chiesa-EstombaResearch Committee of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Socities (IFOS), Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo study the performance of ChatGPT in the management of laryngology and head and neck (LHN) cases.

methodsHistory and clinical examination of patients consulting at the Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery department were presented to ChatGPT, which was interrogated for differential diagnosis, management, and treatment. The ChatGPT performance was assessed by two blinded board-certified otolaryngologists using the following items of a composite score and the Ottawa Clinic Assessment Tool: differential diagnosis; additional examination; and treatment options. The complexity of clinical cases was evaluated with the Amsterdam Clinical Challenge Scale test.

resultsForty clinical cases were submitted to ChatGPT, accounting for 14 (35%), 12 (30%), and 14 (35%) easy, moderate and difficult cases, respectively. ChatGPT indicated a significant higher number of additional examinations compared to practitioners (p = 0.001). There was a significant agreement between practitioners and ChatGPT for the indication of some common examinations (audiometry, ultrasonography, biopsy, gastrointestinal endoscopy or videofluoroscopy). ChatGPT never indicated some important additional examinations (PET-CT, voice quality assessment, or impedance-pH monitoring). ChatGPT reported highest performance in the proposition of the primary (90%) or the most plausible differential diagnoses (65%), and the therapeutic options (60-68%). The ChatGPT performance in the indication of additional examinations was lowest.

conclusionsChatGPT is a promising adjunctive tool in LHN practice, providing extensive documentation about disease-related additional examinations, differential diagnoses, and treatments. The ChatGPT is more efficient in diagnosis and treatment, rather than in the selection of the most adequate additional examination.

Indexed as

OtolaryngologyPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyBiopsyDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansOtolaryngologistsArtificialChatGPTComparisonDiagnosisHead neckIntelligenceLaryngologyLaryngopharyngealOtolaryngologyRefluxSurgeryTreatmentVoice

Identifiers

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.