ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology
Generative AI in urology: rethinking patient counselling and shared decision-making - a scoping review from the European Association of Urology Patient Office.
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. 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.
- Transforming Urological Care With Artificial Intelligence Chatbots: From Digital Assistants to Clinical Partners.International neurourology journal · 2026Review
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
Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) in urology faces challenges including limited health literacy, language barriers, and time constraints that can compromise informed consent and treatment adherence. Generative artificial intelligence (GAI), particularly large language models, offers opportunities to personalise patient education and enhance SDM. Objective: To evaluate the role of GAI applications in SDM for patients with urological conditions. Eligibility criteria: Peer-reviewed observational studies, validation studies, or mixed-methods studies evaluating GAI (e.g., large language models, AI chatbots) in patient communication, education, counselling, or SDM for urological conditions were included. Editorials, opinion pieces, conference abstracts, and non-English language publications were excluded. Source of evidence: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched through June 2025. Study assessments: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, the STROBE or the AGREE II as per study type. Charting methods: Charting methods was performed by using a standardised form. Outcomes of interest included accuracy of GAI-generated information, patient understanding, satisfaction, and decisional conflict. Results: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, 18 observational studies (2023-2025) were included, comprising 310 patients in real-world settings plus hundreds of simulated queries across diverse urological conditions. GAI demonstrated moderate to high accuracy (52%-95%) for guideline-based information, with optimal performance in disease-specific patient education. A prospective comparative study showed 27% reduction in consultation time and improved patient understanding with ChatGPT-4 assistance. Limitations emerged including poor performance in emergencies and complex oncological counselling, and readability issues with content written at a college level (mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 13.5). Most studies evaluated ChatGPT versions, limiting generalizability. Conclusions: GAI could enhance and potentially transform SDM in urology with appropriate clinical oversight and human-in-the-loop governance. Currently, GAI is useful for consultation preparation and patient education, while maintaining physician expertise for complex scenarios. Future implementation should prioritise patient safety, equitable access, and environmental sustainability while developing speciality-specific models and clinician education programmes.
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.