ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2026
Can ChatGPT Be Trusted for Urologic Patient Education? A Comparative Study of Stress Urinary Incontinence-Related Information From Versions 3.5 and 4.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2026. 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.
- Commentary: Beyond the Apnea-Hypopnea Index in the Interpretation of the Obstructive Sleep Apnea-Overactive Bladder Relationship.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
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 and hypothesisThe application of artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT in patient education is expanding rapidly. Female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a common yet often overlooked urological condition. However, the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and evidence-based reliability of ChatGPT's responses to common SUI-related questions remain unclear.
methodsOn the basis of the AUA/SUFU clinical practice guidelines, 22 frequently asked questions regarding female SUI were developed and input into ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4, respectively. Two senior urologists independently evaluated the responses using a 5-point Likert scale for accuracy, comprehensiveness, and relevance. Additionally, the word count of each response was recorded, and the validity of any cited references was verified.
resultsA total of 44 AI-generated responses were analyzed for the 22 SUI-related questions. Both ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 provided high-quality medical information, with accuracy scores of 4.09 and 4.45, respectively (p = 0.097). ChatGPT-4 offered significantly more concise responses (200.55 ± 48.21 words) compared to ChatGPT-3.5 (515.68 ± 198.13 words; p < 0.001). Furthermore, ChatGPT-4 demonstrated a significantly higher proportion of valid citations (72.06% vs. 24.27%, p < 0.001).
conclusionsChatGPT-4 demonstrated strong performance in delivering accurate, concise, and evidence-supported information on female SUI. Future research should expand the scope of evaluation, incorporate patient perspectives, and validate the practical utility and safety of AI tools in real-world clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42435224What 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.