Evaluación de la fiabilidad y legibilidad de las respuestas de los chatbots como recurso de información al paciente para las exploraciones PET-TC más communes.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and readability of responses generated by two popular AI-chatbots, 'ChatGPT-4.0' and 'Google Gemini', to potential patient questions about PET/CT scans.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty potential questions for each of [F]FDG and [Ga]Ga-DOTA-SSTR PET/CT, and twenty-nine potential questions for [Ga]Ga-PSMA PET/CT were asked separately to ChatGPT-4 and Gemini in May 2024. The responses were evaluated for reliability and readability using the modified DISCERN (mDISCERN) scale, Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Gunning Fog Index (GFI), and Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level (FKRGL). The inter-rater reliability of mDISCERN scores provided by three raters (ChatGPT-4, Gemini, and a nuclear medicine physician) for the responses was assessed.

RESULTS

The median [min-max] mDISCERN scores reviewed by the physician for responses about FDG, PSMA and DOTA PET/CT scans were 3.5 [2-4], 3 [3-4], 3 [3-4] for ChatPT-4 and 4 [2-5], 4 [2-5], 3.5 [3-5] for Gemini, respectively. The mDISCERN scores assessed using ChatGPT-4 for answers about FDG, PSMA, and DOTA-SSTR PET/CT scans were 3.5 [3-5], 3 [3-4], 3 [2-3] for ChatGPT-4, and 4 [3-5], 4 [3-5], 4 [3-5] for Gemini, respectively. The mDISCERN scores evaluated using Gemini for responses FDG, PSMA, and DOTA-SSTR PET/CTs were 3 [2-4], 2 [2-4], 3 [2-4] for ChatGPT-4, and 3 [2-5], 3 [1-5], 3 [2-5] for Gemini, respectively. The inter-rater reliability correlation coefficient of mDISCERN scores for ChatGPT-4 responses about FDG, PSMA, and DOTA-SSTR PET/CT scans were 0.629 (95% CI = 0,32-0,812), 0.707 (95% CI = 0.458-0.853) and 0.738 (95% CI = 0.519-0.866), respectively (p < 0.001). The correlation coefficient of mDISCERN scores for Gemini responses about FDG, PSMA, and DOTA-SSTR PET/CT scans were 0.824 (95% CI = 0.677-0.910), 0.881 (95% CI = 0.78-0.94) and 0.847 (95% CI = 0.719-0.922), respectively (p < 0.001). The mDISCERN scores assessed by ChatGPT-4, Gemini, and the physician showed that the chatbots' responses about all PET/CT scans had moderate to good statistical agreement according to the inter-rater reliability correlation coefficient (p < 0,001). There was a statistically significant difference in all readability scores (FKRGL, GFI, and FRE) of ChatGPT-4 and Gemini responses about PET/CT scans (p < 0,001). Gemini responses were shorter and had better readability scores than ChatGPT-4 responses.

CONCLUSION

There was an acceptable level of agreement between raters for the mDISCERN score, indicating agreement with the overall reliability of the responses. However, the information provided by AI-chatbots cannot be easily read by the public.