ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2025
Assessing the accuracy and reproducibility of artificial intelligence-generated medical responses by ChatGPT on Scheuermann's kyphosis.
Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The study aimed to measure the performance and reproducibility of artificial intelligence in answering frequently asked questions about Scheuermann's kyphosis and to compare the artificial intelligence with the SOSORT (International Scientific Society on Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment) consensus in answering case-based questions. Materials and methods: In this cross-sectional study, 75 questions adapted from frequently asked questions about Scheuermann's kyphosis were queried twice on ChatGPT. Response similarity was assessed to investigate reproducibility. The accuracy of responses was scored based on a scale. Four case studies from the end of the 7 Results: ChatGPT provided correct and comprehensive answers to 43 (57.33%) questions, correct but not comprehensive answers to 29 (38.67%) questions, and partially incorrect answers to 3 (4%) questions. ChatGPT performed best in the quality-of-life category, with 18/19 (94.73%) correct scores (score of 1). ChatGPT performed worst in the diagnosis category, with 3/8 (37.5%) correct and comprehensive answers, and in the treatment and follow-up category, with 9/24 (37.5%) correct and comprehensive answers. ChatGPT provided reproducible answers to 92% of the questions. ChatGPT's responses to the treatment of all four case studies were incorrect. Conclusion: While ChatGPT can provide valuable general information regarding Scheuermann's kyphosis, its ability to offer accurate treatment-related advice is limited.
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.