ArticleDigital health
Comparison of artificial intelligence-assisted informed consent obtained before coronary angiography with the conventional method: Medical competence and ethical assessment.
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.
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.
- Review
- AI-assisted consent in paediatric medicine: ethical implications of using large language models to support decision-making.Journal of medical ethics · 2026Article
- IsAI & society · 2026Article
- Empowering Patient Autonomy: The Role of Large Language Models (LLMs) in Scaffolding Informed Consent in Medical Practice.Bioethics · 2026Article
- What are the limits to biomedical research acceleration through general-purpose AI?Scientific reports · 2026Review
- Article
- Augmenting research consent: should large language models (LLMs) be used for informed consent to clinical research?Research ethics · 2025Article
- Latest Advancements and Future Directions in Prostate Cancer Surgery: Reducing Invasiveness and Expanding Indications.Cancers · 2025Review
- Digitalizing informed consent in healthcare: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Enabling Demonstrated Consent for Biobanking with Blockchain and Generative AI.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2025Article
- Risk, Revelation, and Reflection: A Personal Journey Through Ethics, Risk Literacy, and Informed Consent.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2024Article
- Transformative Potential of AI in Healthcare: Definitions, Applications, and Navigating the Ethical Landscape and Public Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Comprehensive consent in urology using decision aids, leaflets, videos and newer technologies: empowering patient choice and shared decision-making.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: At the time of informed consent (IC) for coronary angiography (CAG), patients' knowledge of the process is inadequate. Time constraints and a lack of personalization of consent are the primary causes of inadequate information. This procedure can be enhanced by obtaining IC using a chatbot powered by artificial intelligence (AI). Methods: In the study, patients who will undergo CAG for the first time were randomly divided into two groups, and IC was given to one group using the conventional method and the other group using an AI-supported chatbot, chatGPT3. They were then evaluated with two distinct questionnaires measuring their satisfaction and capacity to understand CAG risks. Results: While the satisfaction questionnaire was equal between the two groups ( Conclusions: AI can be trained to support clinicians in giving IC before CAG. In this way, the workload of healthcare professionals can be reduced while providing a better IC.
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.