文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

评估人工智能生成的患者教育指南:ChatGPT与豆包的比较研究。 需注意,原文中是ChatGPT和Deepseek,你提供的原文有误,我按照正确的Deepseek进行了翻译,若实际需求是其他,请告知。

Evaluating AI-Generated Patient Education Guides: A Comparative Study of ChatGPT and Deepseek.

作者信息

Jabeen Jaziya, Saji Jyothis G

机构信息

Cardiology, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Cornwall, GBR.

Emergency Medicine, Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Thrissur, IND.

出版信息

Cureus. 2025 Jun 3;17(6):e85277. doi: 10.7759/cureus.85277. eCollection 2025 Jun.


DOI:10.7759/cureus.85277
PMID:40612853
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12224519/
Abstract

Introduction Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, including ChatGPT and DeepSeek, are becoming popular tools for generating patient education materials for chronic diseases. AI chatbots are useful as supplements to traditional counseling but lack the empathy and intuition of healthcare professionals, making them most effective when used alongside human therapists. The objective of the study is to compare ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek V3-generated patient educational guides for epilepsy, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methodology In this cross-sectional study, the standardized prompts for each disease were entered into ChatGPT and DeepSeek. The resultant texts were evaluated for readability, originality, quality, and suitability. Unpaired t-tests were performed to analyze statistical differences between tools. Results Both AI tools created patient education materials that had similar word and sentence counts, readability scores, reliability, and suitability in all areas, except for the similarity percentage, which was much higher in ChatGPT outputs (p=0.049). The readability scores indicated that both tools produced content that was above the recommended level for patient materials. Both tools resulted in high similarity indices that exceeded accepted academic thresholds. Reliability scores were moderate, and while understandability was high, actionability scores were suboptimal for both models. Conclusion The patient education materials provided by ChatGPT and DeepSeek are similar in nature, but neither satisfies recommended standards for readability, originality, or actionability. Both still need additional fine-tuning and human oversight to enhance accessibility, reliability, and practical utility in clinical settings.

摘要

引言 包括ChatGPT和豆包在内的人工智能(AI)聊天机器人正成为生成慢性病患者教育材料的流行工具。AI聊天机器人作为传统咨询的补充很有用,但缺乏医疗保健专业人员的同理心和直觉,因此与人类治疗师一起使用时效果最佳。本研究的目的是比较ChatGPT-4o和豆包V3生成的癫痫、心力衰竭、慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)和慢性肾病(CKD)患者教育指南。方法 在这项横断面研究中,将每种疾病的标准化提示输入ChatGPT和豆包。对生成的文本进行可读性、原创性、质量和适用性评估。进行不成对t检验以分析工具之间的统计差异。结果 两种AI工具创建的患者教育材料在单词和句子数量、可读性分数、可靠性和所有领域的适用性方面都相似,除了相似性百分比,ChatGPT输出中的相似性百分比要高得多(p=0.049)。可读性分数表明,两种工具生成的内容都高于患者材料的推荐水平。两种工具的相似性指数都很高,超过了公认的学术阈值。可靠性分数中等,虽然易懂性高,但两种模型的可操作性分数都不理想。结论 ChatGPT和豆包提供的患者教育材料本质上相似,但都不符合可读性、原创性或可操作性的推荐标准。两者仍需要额外的微调以及人工监督,以提高在临床环境中的可及性、可靠性和实际效用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5853/12224519/703fe9b33a4b/cureus-0017-00000085277-i01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5853/12224519/703fe9b33a4b/cureus-0017-00000085277-i01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5853/12224519/703fe9b33a4b/cureus-0017-00000085277-i01.jpg

相似文献

[1]
Evaluating AI-Generated Patient Education Guides: A Comparative Study of ChatGPT and Deepseek.

Cureus. 2025-6-3

[2]
Evaluating ChatGPT and DeepSeek in postdural puncture headache management: a comparative study with international consensus guidelines.

BMC Neurol. 2025-7-1

[3]
Artificial Intelligence in Peripheral Artery Disease Education: A Battle Between ChatGPT and Google Gemini.

Cureus. 2025-6-1

[4]
Artificial Intelligence Shows Limited Success in Improving Readability Levels of Spanish-language Orthopaedic Patient Education Materials.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025-2-11

[5]
Can artificial intelligence improve the readability of patient education information in gynecology?

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2025-6-25

[6]
A Cross-Sectional Comparison of Patient Information Guides Generated by ChatGPT Versus Google Gemini for Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinsonism, and Migraine.

Cureus. 2025-5-20

[7]
Enhancing the Readability of Online Patient Education Materials Using Large Language Models: Cross-Sectional Study.

J Med Internet Res. 2025-6-4

[8]
Evaluating the readability, quality, and reliability of responses generated by ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity on the most commonly asked questions about Ankylosing spondylitis.

PLoS One. 2025-6-18

[9]
Signs and symptoms to determine if a patient presenting in primary care or hospital outpatient settings has COVID-19.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-5-20

[10]
Bridging Health Literacy Gaps in Spine Care: Using ChatGPT-4o to Improve Patient-Education Materials.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2025-6-19

本文引用的文献

[1]
Analysis of Patient Education Guides Generated by ChatGPT and Gemini on Common Anti-diabetic Drugs: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Cureus. 2025-3-25

[2]
Evaluating AI-generated patient education materials for spinal surgeries: Comparative analysis of readability and DISCERN quality across ChatGPT and deepseek models.

Int J Med Inform. 2025-6

[3]
DeepSeek in Healthcare: Revealing Opportunities and Steering Challenges of a New Open-Source Artificial Intelligence Frontier.

Cureus. 2025-2-18

[4]
A Cross-Sectional Study Comparing Patient Education Guides Created by ChatGPT and Google Gemini for Common Cardiovascular-Related Conditions.

Cureus. 2025-1-14

[5]
Comparison of artificial intelligence chatbots in delivering quality anaesthesia information for patients undergoing laparoscopic hernioplasty.

Br J Anaesth. 2025-4

[6]
How generative artificial intelligence portrays science: Interviewing ChatGPT from the perspective of different audience segments.

Public Underst Sci. 2025-2

[7]
The effectiveness of an individual and family self-management theory-based education program given for adolescents with epilepsy and parents: Randomized controlled trial.

J Pediatr Nurs. 2024

[8]
Readability and Information Quality in Cancer Information From a Free vs Paid Chatbot.

JAMA Netw Open. 2024-7-1

[9]
Generative artificial intelligence, patient safety and healthcare quality: a review.

BMJ Qual Saf. 2024-10-18

[10]
Roles, Users, Benefits, and Limitations of Chatbots in Health Care: Rapid Review.

J Med Internet Res. 2024-7-23

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索