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 vs UpToDate: comparative study of usefulness and reliability of Chatbot in common clinical presentations of otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery.
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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the Accuracy, Completeness, and Reference Quality of GPT-4 and Google for Gynecologic Cancer Information: Comparative Quantitative Study.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Large Language Model Responses to Common Otolaryngological Questions: Evaluating Accuracy, Appropriateness, Readability, and Hallucinations.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Observational
- Perceptions and Attitudes of Medical Students Toward the Integration of Large Language Models in Medical Education: Cross-Sectional Survey in China.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Dosage adjustments in renal impairment among medical ward patients: ChatGPT® and DeepSeek® models' effectiveness in assessing those adjustments.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Are ChatGPT's Answers to Questions About Salivary Gland Diseases Accurate and Reliable?Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2025Article
- Applications of Natural Language Processing in Otolaryngology: A Scoping Review.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- 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 · 2025Article
- Article
- Clinical Characteristics of Children with Acute Post-Streptococcal Glomerulonephritis and Re-Evaluation of Patients with Artificial Intelligence.Medeniyet medical journal · 2024Article
- Is ChatGPT 3.5 smarter than Otolaryngology trainees? A comparison study of board style exam questions.PloS one · 2024Article
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
purposeThe usage of Chatbots as a kind of Artificial Intelligence in medicine is getting to increase in recent years. UpToDate® is another well-known search tool established on evidence-based knowledge and is used daily by doctors worldwide. In this study, we aimed to investigate the usefulness and reliability of ChatGPT compared to UpToDate in Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery (ORL-HNS). MATERIALS AND
methodsChatGPT-3.5 and UpToDate were interrogated for the management of 25 common clinical case scenarios (13 males/12 females) recruited from literature considering the daily observation at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology of Ege University Faculty of Medicine. Scientific references for the management were requested for each clinical case. The accuracy of the references in the ChatGPT answers was assessed on a 0-2 scale and the usefulness of the ChatGPT and UpToDate answers was assessed with 1-3 scores by reviewers. UpToDate and ChatGPT 3.5 responses were compared.
resultsChatGPT did not give references in some questions in contrast to UpToDate. Information on the ChatGPT was limited to 2021. UpToDate supported the paper with subheadings, tables, figures, and algorithms. The mean accuracy score of references in ChatGPT answers was 0.25-weak/unrelated. The median (Q1-Q3) was 1.00 (1.25-2.00) for ChatGPT and 2.63 (2.75-3.00) for UpToDate, the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). UpToDate was observed more useful and reliable than ChatGPT.
conclusionsChatGPT has the potential to support the physicians to find out the information but our results suggest that ChatGPT needs to be improved to increase the usefulness and reliability of medical evidence-based knowledge.
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.