Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38127304›Full record

ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2023

Accuracy and comprehensibility of chat-based artificial intelligence for patient information on atrial fibrillation and cardiac implantable electronic devices.

Henrike A K Hillmann, Eleonora Angelini, Nizar Karfoul, Sebastian Feickert, Johanna Mueller-Leisse, David Duncker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Effect of targeted education of patients with atrial fibrillation on unplanned cardiovascular outcomes: results of the multicentre randomized AF-EduCare trial.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Feasibility and accuracy of wearable electrocardiogram monitoring in adult congenital heart disease.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025
    Article
  8. EHRA perspective on the digital data revolution in arrhythmia management: insights from the association's annual summit.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025
    Review
  9. Reliability of large language models for reviewing research with artificial intelligence in cardiac electrophysiology using the European Heart Rhythm Association artificial intelligence checklist.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. PULSE survey: Population Survey on Knowledge, Gaps and Perception of Heart Rhythm disorders-an initiative of the Scientific Initiatives Committee of the European Heart Rhythm Association.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Henrike A K HillmannHannover Heart Rhythm Center, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6916-2652
Eleonora AngeliniHannover Heart Rhythm Center, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.
Nizar KarfoulHannover Heart Rhythm Center, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3486-8230
Sebastian FeickertDepartment of Cardiology and Internal Intensive Care Unit, Vivantes Clinic Am Urban, Dieffenbachstraße 1, 10967 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1747-298X
Johanna Mueller-LeisseHannover Heart Rhythm Center, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3485-7657
David DunckerHannover Heart Rhythm Center, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2996-6338

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsNatural language processing chatbots (NLPC) can be used to gather information for medical content. However, these tools contain a potential risk of misinformation. This study aims to evaluate different aspects of responses given by different NLPCs on questions about atrial fibrillation (AF) and clinical implantable electronic devices (CIED). METHODS AND

resultsQuestions were entered into three different NLPC interfaces. Responses were evaluated with regard to appropriateness, comprehensibility, appearance of confabulation, absence of relevant content, and recommendations given for clinically relevant decisions. Moreover, readability was assessed by calculating word count and Flesch Reading Ease score. 52, 60, and 84% of responses on AF and 16, 72, and 88% on CIEDs were evaluated to be appropriate for all responses given by Google Bard, (GB) Bing Chat (BC) and ChatGPT Plus (CGP), respectively. Assessment of comprehensibility showed that 96, 88, and 92% of responses on AF and 92 and 88%, and 100% on CIEDs were comprehensible for all responses created by GB, BC, and CGP, respectively. Readability varied between different NLPCs. Relevant aspects were missing in 52% (GB), 60% (BC), and 24% (CGP) for AF, and in 92% (GB), 88% (BC), and 52% (CGP) for CIEDs.

conclusionResponses generated by an NLPC are mostly easy to understand with varying readability between the different NLPCs. The appropriateness of responses is limited and varies between different NLPCs. Important aspects are often missed to be mentioned. Thus, chatbots should be used with caution to gather medical information about cardiac arrhythmias and devices.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationDefibrillators, ImplantableArtificial IntelligenceElectronicsHumansRisk FactorsArtificial intelligenceAtrial fibrillationCardiac electrophysiologyCardiac implantable devicesDigital healthPatient education

Identifiers

PMID38127304
PMCPMC10824484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.