ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Potential of AI Chatbots in Online Hair Transplantation Consultations: A Multi-metric Assessment of Three Models.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pilot Study: ChatGPT-enabled Task Sharing and Team Building Improve Workflow in Lymphedema Care.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
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
backgroundThe use of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots has demonstrated considerable promise in assisting medical consultations. However, their potential for application in online hair transplantation consultations remains largely unexplored.
objectivesThis study aims to assess the effectiveness of AI chatbots in responding to patient inquiries during online hair transplantation consultations.
methodsWe evaluated responses to 10 common patient questions collected from online hair transplantation clinics, comparing answers generated by three AI chatbots-ChatGPT-4o mini, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Gemini Advanced-with those from senior surgeons. Each response was scored based on medical accuracy, empathy, understandability, actionability, and readability, with a focus on determining how well AI can match or exceed human expert performance.
resultsAll three AI chatbots matched or outperformed the response capabilities of senior surgeons in medical accuracy, empathy, understandability, actionability, and readability. Among them, Gemini Advanced showed the most comprehensive advantages, including significantly higher scores in medical accuracy (4.5 vs. 3.9, P < .001), empathy (4.9 vs. 2.5, P < .001), and understandability (82.7% vs. 63.9%, P < .001). Additionally, Gemini Advanced demonstrated a lower Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (10.5 vs. 18.7, P < .001) and higher Flesch Reading Ease Score (40.3 vs. 16.2, P < .001), suggesting better readability.
conclusionAI chatbots show strong potential for use in online hair transplantation consultations, providing accurate, empathetic, and easily understandable responses. Nevertheless, challenges such as privacy concerns, ethical considerations, and potential biases need to be addressed before their adoption in clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40781376What 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.