ArticleInternational journal of obesity (2005)2025
Assessing online chat-based artificial intelligence models for weight loss recommendation appropriateness and bias in the presence of guideline incongruence.
Article in International journal of obesity (2005), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimManaging obesity requires a comprehensive approach that involves therapeutic lifestyle changes, medications, or metabolic surgery. Many patients seek health information from online sources and artificial intelligence models like ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot before consulting health professionals. This study aims to evaluate the appropriateness of the responses of Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot to questions on pharmacologic and surgical management of obesity and assess for bias in their responses to either the ADA or AACE guidelines.
methodsTen questions were compiled into a set and posed separately to the free editions of Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot. Recommendations for the questions were extracted from the ADA and the AACE websites, and the responses were graded by reviewers for appropriateness, completeness, and bias to any of the guidelines.
resultsAll responses from Microsoft Copilot and 8/10 (80%) responses from Google Gemini were appropriate. There were no inappropriate responses. Google Gemini refused to respond to two questions and insisted on consulting a physician. Microsoft Copilot (10/10; 100%) provided a higher proportion of complete responses than Google Gemini (5/10; 50%). Of the eight responses from Google Gemini, none were biased towards any of the guidelines, while two of the responses from Microsoft Copilot were biased.
conclusionThe study highlights the role of Microsoft Copilot and Google Gemini in weight loss management. The differences in their responses may be attributed to the variation in the quality and scope of their training data and design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39871015What 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.