Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38794965›Full record

ArticleThe American surgeon2025

Evaluating the Accuracy, Comprehensiveness, and Validity of ChatGPT Compared to Evidence-Based Sources Regarding Common Surgical Conditions: Surgeons' Perspectives.

Hazem Nasef, Heli Patel, Quratulain Amin, Samuel Baum, Asanthi Ratnasekera, Darwin Ang, William S Havron, Don Nakayama, Adel Elkbuli

Expression of concernAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American surgeon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It carries an expression of concern. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Is there any room for ChatGPT AI bot in speech-language pathology?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
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Hazem NasefNOVA Southeastern University, Kiran Patel College of Allopathic Medicine, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA.
Heli PatelNOVA Southeastern University, Kiran Patel College of Allopathic Medicine, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA.
Quratulain AminNOVA Southeastern University, Kiran Patel College of Allopathic Medicine, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA.
Samuel BaumLouisiana State University Health Science Center, College of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Asanthi RatnasekeraDepartment of Surgery, Drexel College of Medicine, Newark, DE, USA.
Darwin AngDepartment of Surgery, Ocala Regional Medical Center, Ocala, FL, USA.
William S HavronDepartment of Surgical Education, Orlando Regional Medical Center, Orlando, FL, USA.
Don NakayamaMercer University School of Medicine, Columbus, GA, USA.
Adel ElkbuliDepartment of Surgical Education, Orlando Regional Medical Center, Orlando, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundThis study aims to assess the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and validity of ChatGPT compared to evidence-based sources regarding the diagnosis and management of common surgical conditions by surveying the perceptions of U.S. board-certified practicing surgeons.MethodsAn anonymous cross-sectional survey was distributed to U.S. practicing surgeons from June 2023 to March 2024. The survey comprised 94 multiple-choice questions evaluating diagnostic and management information for five common surgical conditions from evidence-based sources or generated by ChatGPT. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics and paired-sample t-tests.ResultsParticipating surgeons were primarily aged 40-50 years (43%), male (86%), White (57%), and had 5-10 years or >15 years of experience (86%). The majority of surgeons had no prior experience with ChatGPT in surgical practice (86%). For material discussing both acute cholecystitis and upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage, evidence-based sources were rated as significantly more comprehensive (3.57 (±.535) vs 2.00 (±1.16),

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelEvidence-Based MedicineSurgeonsSurgical Procedures, OperativeAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesChatGPTclinical practicecommon surgical conditionsevidence-based medicineU.S surgeons

Identifiers

PMID38794965

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.