ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
A custom ChatGPT can accurately answer questions from an international expert osteotomy consensus statement.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThis study aimed to assess the accuracy of a custom ChatGPT in responding to questions specifically related to high tibial osteotomies (HTO), using an international expert osteotomy consensus statement as the source of information.
methodsA custom ChatGPT was developed using European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) osteotomy consensus for the painful degenerative varus knee as the primary training material. The custom ChatGPT was then tested for accuracy by generating responses to a series of 10 questions:five directly extracted from the consensus statement (Identical group) and five other common questions related to HTO (Random group). The generated responses were assessed by three knee surgeons using a bespoke scoring system. The scoring system evaluated accuracy, relevance, clarity, completeness, and adherence to the consensus. Each item was scored on a four-point Likert scale from 0 to 3. Inter-rater reliability was calculated with an intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultsA total of 30 questions were asked to the custom ChatGPT by the three raters. The mean scores for accuracy, relevance, and clarity were 2.5 ± 0.8, 2.9 ± 0.3, and 2.9 ± 0.2, respectively. The inter-rater reliability for these scores was good (ICC 0.7, p = 0.004). Whereas, the mean score for completeness was 2.6 ± 0.5 with moderate inter-rater reliability (ICC 0.5, p = 0.1) and the mean score for adherence to the consensus statement document was 2.5 ± 1.1 with excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC 0.9, p < 0.001). There was no significant intergroup difference in accuracy, relevance, clarity and completeness (All p > 0.05). Only adherence to PDF was significantly lower in the random group 1.9 ± 0.5 versus 3 in the identical group (p = 0.01).
conclusionA custom ChatGPT can be trained to accurately answer questions from an international expert osteotomy consensus statement, indicating effective training and customization. This can serve as a valuable tool to guide surgeons in their practice by providing evidence-based answers to key questions in a time-efficient manner and is potentially applicable to other consensus statements and published literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40522338What 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.