ArticlePostepy dermatologii i alergologii2025
Comparing physician and artificial intelligence ChatGPT-4 responses to common patient questions regarding hidradenitis suppurativa: a single-blind study.
Article in Postepy dermatologii i alergologii, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions of Large Language Models in Health Care Communication: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Seasonal Variation of Plaque Psoriasis in Relation to Individualized MED-Adjusted Ultraviolet Exposure: A Cross-Sectional Study in Poland.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Knowledge and attitudes towards artificial intelligence use in healthcare among the general public in Jordan.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Artificial intelligence in medicine has increased enormously in recent years. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of ChatGPT-4 in answering common patient queries about hidradenitis suppurativa. Material and methods: A group of 31 physicians and 30 patients suffering from hidradenitis suppurativa independently evaluated and compared the quality, empathy, and satisfaction of the ChatGPT-4's and the dermatologist's responses to patient queries, in a single-blind study, without any information about answers' sources beforehand to minimize bias. Additionally, on the last page of the questionnaire, without the possibility of returning to assess the answers, the question was asked "Given that AI can answer your questions more accurately and empathetically than a doctor, who would you rather receive an answer from, the doctor or the AI". Results: For each variable, patients as well as medical doctors rated the answers generated by ChatGPT-4 significantly better than the answers provided by the dermatologist ( Conclusions: Our study revealed that despite ChatGPT-4's responses being rated better than the physician's, patients still prefer medical doctors as a source of information. Thus, AI will not replace physicians soon, although we should undoubtedly learn to live and cooperate with it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.