ArticleCureus2026
ChatGPT in Orthopedic Trauma: Consistency, Accuracy, and Agreement With Textbook and Expert Opinion.
Article in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT are increasingly used in clinical settings, yet their reliability remains unclear. Methods This study compared ChatGPT-4o's responses to clinically relevant orthopedic questions on femoral neck and trochanteric fractures with expert consensus and Rockwood and Green's textbook. Seven questions were submitted in repeated sessions to assess consistency. Textual similarity was measured using cosine similarity and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT)-based models, alongside readability indices and Cohen's Kappa for agreement. Results ChatGPT demonstrated high internal consistency (mean cosine similarity: 0.94-0.98) but only partial agreement with textbook content (mean similarity: 0.88; Cohen's Kappa: 0.16) and expert opinion survey (Cohen's Kappa: 0.16). Discrepancies were noted in age thresholds for arthroplasty and preferred nail length in subtrochanteric fractures, suggesting reliance on outdated sources. Conclusion Although ChatGPT provided coherent and readable answers, knowledge gaps persist. This highlights the need for curated, domain-specific models and transparent data sourcing. AI shows promise but should complement, not replace, clinical judgment and up-to-date references.
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.