Evaluating the Quality of Online Information Regarding Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer

Stevens, Lena; Guo, Marissa; Brown, Zachary J.; Ejaz, Aslam; Pawlik, Timothy M.; Cloyd, Jordan M.

doi:10.1007/s12029-022-00879-z

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…26 Patients and caregivers often have difficulty recalling information from office visits, and information found online is only of moderate quality/reliability. [27][28][29] Our study suggests that caregivers value transparency and honesty from providers. As such, clearly discussing treatment options and providing expectations for NT, symptom management, and expected treatment effects is critical.…”

Section: Impact Frequency Representative Quotementioning

confidence: 72%

“…Whereas most caregivers eventually understood the rationale for NT, many reported hoping for upfront surgery to “just get the cancer out.” Indeed, because not all patients who initiate NT will be able to undergo surgical resection, this decision carries uncertainty and fear among patients and caregivers alike 26 . Patients and caregivers often have difficulty recalling information from office visits, and information found online is only of moderate quality/reliability 27–29 . Our study suggests that caregivers value transparency and honesty from providers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating the caregiver experience during neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Ruff,

Stevens,

Bressler

et al. 2023

Journal of Surgical Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionNeoadjuvant therapy (NT) is increasingly recommended for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Recent research has highlighted the significant treatment burden that patients experience during NT, but caregiver well‐being during NT is poorly understood.MethodsA cross‐sectional mixed‐methods analysis of primary caregivers of patients with localized PDAC receiving NT was undertaken. All patients completed the Caregiver Quality of Life Index‐Cancer (CQOLC) survey, while semi‐structured interviews were conducted among a convenience sample of participants.ResultsAmong 28 caregivers, the mean age was 60.1 years, and most were patient spouses/significant others (71.4%). Patients had resectable (18%), borderline resectable (46%), or locally advanced (36%) PDAC with a mean treatment duration of 2.9 months at the time of their caregiver's enrollment. Most caregivers felt that they received adequate emotional/psychosocial support (80%) and understood the rationale for NT (93%). A majority (60%) reported that caregiving responsibilities impacted their daily lives and required a decrease in their work hours, leading to financial challenges (47%). While overall QOL was moderate (mean 83 ± 21.1, range 0–140), “emotional burden” (47.3 ± 20.9), and “positive adaption” (57.3 ± 13.9) were the lowest ranked CQOLC subsection scores.DiscussionCaregivers of patients with PDAC undergoing NT experience significant emotional symptoms and impact on their daily lives. Assessing caregiver needs and providing resources during NT should be a priority.

show abstract

Section: Impact Frequency Representative Quotementioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Evaluating the caregiver experience during neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Ruff,

Stevens,

Bressler

et al. 2023

Journal of Surgical Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For gallstone disease, a median EQIP score of 15 (IQR 13-18) has been reported, which is lower than the score achieved by the AI of 16 [ 21 ]. Low quality of internet-available medical information for patients has been reported for a number of other conditions, including pancreatic cancer, appendicitis, and COVID-19, among others [ 22 , 23 , 26 ]. Given the fact that the studied AI application relies on information available online, similarity in results can partially be explained by the AI mirroring available knowledge.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The modified EQIP score was used for the analysis [14,15]. This score consists of 36 items and is divided into 3 domains: content (questions 1-18), identification (19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24), and structure data (items [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36]. Each condition was assessed using a spreadsheet including all of the 36 modified EQIP tool items.…”

Section: Modified Eqip Tool and Data Entrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument

Walker¹,

Ghani²,

Kümmerli³

et al. 2023

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background ChatGPT-4 is the latest release of a novel artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot able to answer freely formulated and complex questions. In the near future, ChatGPT could become the new standard for health care professionals and patients to access medical information. However, little is known about the quality of medical information provided by the AI. Objective We aimed to assess the reliability of medical information provided by ChatGPT. Methods Medical information provided by ChatGPT-4 on the 5 hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) conditions with the highest global disease burden was measured with the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool. The EQIP tool is used to measure the quality of internet-available information and consists of 36 items that are divided into 3 subsections. In addition, 5 guideline recommendations per analyzed condition were rephrased as questions and input to ChatGPT, and agreement between the guidelines and the AI answer was measured by 2 authors independently. All queries were repeated 3 times to measure the internal consistency of ChatGPT. Results Five conditions were identified (gallstone disease, pancreatitis, liver cirrhosis, pancreatic cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma). The median EQIP score across all conditions was 16 (IQR 14.5-18) for the total of 36 items. Divided by subsection, median scores for content, identification, and structure data were 10 (IQR 9.5-12.5), 1 (IQR 1-1), and 4 (IQR 4-5), respectively. Agreement between guideline recommendations and answers provided by ChatGPT was 60% (15/25). Interrater agreement as measured by the Fleiss κ was 0.78 (P<.001), indicating substantial agreement. Internal consistency of the answers provided by ChatGPT was 100%. Conclusions ChatGPT provides medical information of comparable quality to available static internet information. Although currently of limited quality, large language models could become the future standard for patients and health care professionals to gather medical information.

show abstract

Assessment of readability, reliability, and quality of ChatGPT®, BARD®, Gemini®, Copilot®, Perplexity® responses on palliative care

Hancı,

Ergün,

Gül

et al. 2024

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is no study that comprehensively evaluates data on the readability and quality of “palliative care” information provided by artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots ChatGPT®, Bard®, Gemini®, Copilot®, Perplexity®. Our study is an observational and cross-sectional original research study. In our study, AI chatbots ChatGPT®, Bard®, Gemini®, Copilot®, and Perplexity® were asked to present the answers of the 100 questions most frequently asked by patients about palliative care. Responses from each 5 AI chatbots were analyzed separately. This study did not involve any human participants. Study results revealed significant differences between the readability assessments of responses from all 5 AI chatbots (P < .05). According to the results of our study, when different readability indexes were evaluated holistically, the readability of AI chatbot responses was evaluated as Bard®, Copilot®, Perplexity®, ChatGPT®, Gemini®, from easy to difficult (P < .05). In our study, the median readability indexes of each of the 5 AI chatbots Bard®, Copilot®, Perplexity®, ChatGPT®, Gemini® responses were compared to the “recommended” 6th grade reading level. According to the results of our study answers of all 5 AI chatbots were compared with the 6th grade reading level, statistically significant differences were observed in the all formulas (P < .001). The answers of all 5 artificial intelligence robots were determined to be at an educational level well above the 6th grade level. The modified DISCERN and Journal of American Medical Association scores was found to be the highest in Perplexity® (P < .001). Gemini® responses were found to have the highest Global Quality Scale score (P < .001). It is emphasized that patient education materials should have a readability level of 6th grade level. Of the 5 AI chatbots whose answers about palliative care were evaluated, Bard®, Copilot®, Perplexity®, ChatGPT®, Gemini®, their current answers were found to be well above the recommended levels in terms of readability of text content. Text content quality assessment scores are also low. Both the quality and readability of texts should be brought to appropriate recommended limits.

show abstract

Evaluating the Quality of Online Information Regarding Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer

Cited by 5 publications

References 31 publications

Evaluating the caregiver experience during neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Evaluating the caregiver experience during neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument

Assessment of readability, reliability, and quality of ChatGPT®, BARD®, Gemini®, Copilot®, Perplexity® responses on palliative care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About