ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Evaluating Generative Artificial Intelligence Models' Responses to Questions About Scaphoid Fracture and Scaphoid Nonunion.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate and compare the responses of ChatGPT and Google Gemini to common patient questions about scaphoid fracture and scaphoid nonunion, and to compare responses between hand fellowship-trained orthopedic and plastic surgeons. Methods: A list of 30 common patient questions about scaphoid fracture and nonunion was developed and classified using Norman Webb's Depth of Knowledge levels 1-4. Each question was input into ChatGPT-4o and Google Gemini 2.0 Flash. An evaluation guide was created with four domains for each response, each rated on a Likert scale from 1-5: accuracy, clarity, Artificial Intelligence Response Metric, and comparison to an in-person clinician interaction. Responses were evaluated by three orthopedic and three plastic hand surgeons. Statistical comparisons were performed using nonparametric tests to assess differences between AI platforms, domains, question complexity, and surgical specialty. Results: There were no considerable differences between mean Likert scale scores for ChatGPT and Google Gemini. Plastic surgeons rated responses higher than orthopedic surgeons overall and for ChatGPT. Google Gemini performed better for DOK level 2 and level 3 questions. ChatGPT's responses had greater clarity. For both platforms, ratings for clinician comparability across all DOK levels were considerably lower than scores for all other metrics. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that ChatGPT and Google Gemini offer clinical use for patient care regarding scaphoid fracture and nonunion. However, clinician comparability was not a key strength for either platform, highlighting a key area for improvement for AI-based large language models in clinical application. Type of Study/level of evidence: Diagnostic V.
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.