Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40596359›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Comparison of physician and large language model chatbot responses to online ear, nose, and throat inquiries.

Masaomi Motegi, Masato Shino, Mikio Kuwabara, Hideyuki Takahashi, Toshiyuki Matsuyama, Hiroe Tada, Hiroyuki Hagiwara, Kazuaki Chikamatsu

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  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.

Masaomi MotegiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showamachi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan. m_motegi@gunma-u.ac.jp.
Masato ShinoDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showamachi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.
Mikio KuwabaraDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showamachi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.
Hideyuki TakahashiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showamachi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.
Toshiyuki MatsuyamaDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showamachi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.
Hiroe TadaDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showamachi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.
Hiroyuki HagiwaraDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showamachi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.
Kazuaki ChikamatsuDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showamachi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) can potentially enhance the accessibility and quality of medical information. This study evaluates the reliability and quality of responses generated by ChatGPT-4, an LLM-driven chatbot, compared to those written by physicians, focusing on otorhinolaryngological advice in real-world, text-based workflows. Responses from a public social media forum were anonymized, and ChatGPT-4 generated corresponding replies. A panel of seven board-certified otorhinolaryngologists assessed both sets of responses using six criteria: overall quality, empathy, alignment with medical consensus, information accuracy, inquiry comprehension, and harm potential. Ordinal logistic regression analysis identified factors influencing response quality. ChatGPT-4 responses were preferred in 70.7% of cases and were significantly longer (median: 162 words) than physician responses (median: 67 words; P < .0001). The chatbot's responses received higher ratings across all criteria, with key predictors of this higher quality being greater empathy, stronger alignment with medical consensus, lower potential for harm, and fewer inaccuracies. ChatGPT-4 consistently outperformed physicians in generating responses that adhered to medical consensus, demonstrated accuracy, and conveyed empathy. These findings suggest that integrating AI tools into text-based healthcare consultations could help physicians better address complex, nuanced inquiries and provide high-quality, comprehensive medical advice.

Indexed as

LanguageOtolaryngologyPhysiciansSocial MediaFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansLarge Language ModelsMaleArtificial intelligenceChatbotsLarge language modelOnline medical consultationOtorhinolaryngology

Identifiers

PMID40596359
PMCPMC12215459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.