ArticleCureus2024
Artificial Intelligence as a Consent Aid for Carpal Tunnel Release.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Article
- LuminaConsent: AI-driven standardization and quality enhancement of urological informed consent documentation.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of the Quality and Reliability of ChatGPT-4's Responses on Allergen Immunotherapy Using Validated Instruments for Health Information Quality Assessment.Clinical and translational allergy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Hand surgeons have been charged with the use of diverse modalities to enhance the consenting process following the Montgomery ruling. Artificial Intelligence language models have been suggested as patient education tools that may aid consent. Methods We compared the quality and readability of the Every Informed Decision Online (EIDO) patient information leaflet for carpal tunnel release with the artificial intelligence language model Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT). Results The quality of information by ChatGPT was significantly higher using the DISCERN score, 71/80 for ChatGPT compared to 62/80 for EIDO (p=0.014). DISCERN interrater observer reliability was high (0.65) using the kappa statistic. Flesch-Kincaid readability scoring was 12.3 for ChatGPT and 7.5 for EIDO, suggesting a more complex reading age for the ChatGPT information. Conclusion The artificial intelligence language model ChatGPT produces high-quality information at the expense of readability when compared to EIDO information leaflets for carpal tunnel release consent.
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.