ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024
Performance of Large Language Models in Patient Complaint Resolution: Web-Based Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- AI chatbots versus human healthcare professionals: a systematic review and meta-analysis of empathy in patient care.British medical bulletin · 2025Pooled it
- Enhancing complaint locations prediction with image-space embedding representations and customized large language models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Prompt Framing Modulates Safety in Shoulder and Elbow Red-Flag Vignettes: A Large Language Model Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Classification of pediatric dental diseases from panoramic radiographs using natural language transformer and deep learning models.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Large Language Models and Communication of Medical Probabilities.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Comparative Efficacy of ChatGPT and DeepSeek in Addressing Patient Queries on Gonarthrosis and Total Knee Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
- Review
- Early diagnosis and survival outcomes in silicosis: a retrospective cohort study of 11,809 patients in Guangdong Province, China (1956-2020).Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Considerations and Challenges in the Application of Large Language Models for Patient Complaint Resolution.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient complaints are a perennial challenge faced by health care institutions globally, requiring extensive time and effort from health care workers. Despite these efforts, patient dissatisfaction remains high. Recent studies on the use of large language models (LLMs) such as the GPT models developed by OpenAI in the health care sector have shown great promise, with the ability to provide more detailed and empathetic responses as compared to physicians. LLMs could potentially be used in responding to patient complaints to improve patient satisfaction and complaint response time.
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the performance of LLMs in addressing patient complaints received by a tertiary health care institution, with the goal of enhancing patient satisfaction.
methodsAnonymized patient complaint emails and associated responses from the patient relations department were obtained. ChatGPT-4.0 (OpenAI, Inc) was provided with the same complaint email and tasked to generate a response. The complaints and the respective responses were uploaded onto a web-based questionnaire. Respondents were asked to rate both responses on a 10-point Likert scale for 4 items: appropriateness, completeness, empathy, and satisfaction. Participants were also asked to choose a preferred response at the end of each scenario.
resultsThere was a total of 188 respondents, of which 115 (61.2%) were health care workers. A majority of the respondents, including both health care and non-health care workers, preferred replies from ChatGPT (n=164, 87.2% to n=183, 97.3%). GPT-4.0 responses were rated higher in all 4 assessed items with all median scores of 8 (IQR 7-9) compared to human responses (appropriateness 5, IQR 3-7; empathy 4, IQR 3-6; quality 5, IQR 3-6; satisfaction 5, IQR 3-6; P<.001) and had higher average word counts as compared to human responses (238 vs 76 words). Regression analyses showed that a higher word count was a statistically significant predictor of higher score in all 4 items, with every 1-word increment resulting in an increase in scores of between 0.015 and 0.019 (all P<.001). However, on subgroup analysis by authorship, this only held true for responses written by patient relations department staff and not those generated by ChatGPT which received consistently high scores irrespective of response length.
conclusionsThis study provides significant evidence supporting the effectiveness of LLMs in resolution of patient complaints. ChatGPT demonstrated superiority in terms of response appropriateness, empathy, quality, and overall satisfaction when compared against actual human responses to patient complaints. Future research can be done to measure the degree of improvement that artificial intelligence generated responses can bring in terms of time savings, cost-effectiveness, patient satisfaction, and stress reduction for the health care system.
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.