Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39356355›Full record

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

Accuracy of ChatGPT responses on tracheotomy for patient education.

Amina Khaldi, Shahram Machayekhi, Michele Salvagno, Antonino Maniaci, Luigi A Vaira, Luigi La Via, Fabio S Taccone, Jerome R Lechien

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Evaluating the Accuracy, Reliability, Consistency, and Readability of Different Large Language Models in Restorative Dentistry.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Artificial intelligence in otorhinolaryngology: current trends and application areas.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
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Amina KhaldiIntensive Care Unit, EpiCURA Hospital, Hornu, Belgium.
Shahram MachayekhiIntensive Care Unit, EpiCURA Hospital, Hornu, Belgium.
Michele SalvagnoIntensive Care Unit, Erasme Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.
Antonino ManiaciFaculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Enna Kore, Enna, 94100, Italy.
Luigi A VairaMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Pharmacy, University of Sassari, Viale San Pietro 43/B, Sassari, 07100, Italy.
Luigi La ViaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, University Hospital Policlinico "G.Rodolico-San Marco", Catania, Italy.
Fabio S TacconeIntensive Care Unit, Erasme Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.
Jerome R LechienDepartment of Surgery, UMONS Research Institute for Health Sciences and Technology, University of Mons (UMons), Mons, Belgium. Jerome.Lechien@umons.ac.be.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the accuracy of information provided by ChatGPT-4o to patients about tracheotomy.

methodsTwenty common questions of patients about tracheotomy were presented to ChatGPT-4o twice (7-day intervals). The accuracy, clarity, relevance, completeness, referencing, and usefulness of responses were assessed by a board-certified otolaryngologist and a board-certified intensive care unit practitioner with the Quality Analysis of Medical Artificial Intelligence (QAMAI) tool. The interrater reliability and the stability of the ChatGPT-4o responses were evaluated with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson correlation analysis.

resultsThe total scores of QAMAI were 22.85 ± 4.75 for the intensive care practitioner and 21.45 ± 3.95 for the otolaryngologist, which consists of moderate-to-high accuracy. The otolaryngologist and the ICU practitioner reported high ICC (0.807; 95%CI: 0.655-0.911). The highest QAMAI scores have been found for clarity and completeness of explanations. The QAMAI scores for the accuracy of the information and the referencing were the lowest. The information related to the post-laryngectomy tracheostomy remains incomplete or erroneous. ChatGPT-4o did not provide references for their responses. The stability analysis reported high stability in regenerated questions.

conclusionThe accuracy of ChatGPT-4o is moderate-to-high in providing information related to the tracheotomy. However, patients using ChatGPT-4o need to be cautious about the information related to tracheotomy care, steps, and the differences between temporary and permanent tracheotomies.

Indexed as

Patient Education as TopicTracheotomyArtificial IntelligenceFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesAccuracyArtificial intelligenceChatGPTHead neckInformationIntensive careLLMOtolaryngologySurgeryTracheotomy

Identifiers

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.