ChatGPT and oral cancer: a study on informational reliability
Abstract Background Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT have transformed information retrieval, including in healthcare. ChatGPT, trained on diverse datasets, can provide medical advice but faces ethical and accuracy concerns. This study evaluates the accuracy...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | BMC Oral Health |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05479-4 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832585394660573184 |
|---|---|
| author | Mesude Çi̇ti̇r |
| author_facet | Mesude Çi̇ti̇r |
| author_sort | Mesude Çi̇ti̇r |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT have transformed information retrieval, including in healthcare. ChatGPT, trained on diverse datasets, can provide medical advice but faces ethical and accuracy concerns. This study evaluates the accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5's answers to frequently asked questions about oral cancer, a condition where early diagnosis is crucial for improving patient outcomes. Methods A total of 20 questions were asked to ChatGPT-3.5, selected from Google Trends and questions asked by patients in the clinic. The responses provided by ChatGPT were evaluated for accuracy by medical oncologists and oral and maxillofacial radiologists. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using Fleiss’s and Cohen kappa tests. The scores given by the specialties were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. The references provided by ChatGPT-3.5 were evaluated for authenticity. Results Of the 80 responses from 20 questions, 41 (51.25%) were rated as very good, 37 (46.25%) as good, 2 (2.50%) as acceptable. There was no significant difference between oral and maxillofacial radiologists and medical oncologists in all 20 questions. Of the 81 references to ChatGPT-3.5 answers, only 13 were scientific articles, 10 were fake, and the remaining references were data from websites. Conclusion ChatGPT provided reliable information about oral cancer and did not provide incorrect information and suggestions. However, all information provided by ChatGPT is not based on real references. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-ed68ff4706b74f86b2955746df97aba0 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1472-6831 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Oral Health |
| spelling | doaj-art-ed68ff4706b74f86b2955746df97aba02025-01-26T12:55:22ZengBMCBMC Oral Health1472-68312025-01-012511710.1186/s12903-025-05479-4ChatGPT and oral cancer: a study on informational reliabilityMesude Çi̇ti̇r0Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Tokat Gaziosmanpasa UniversityAbstract Background Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT have transformed information retrieval, including in healthcare. ChatGPT, trained on diverse datasets, can provide medical advice but faces ethical and accuracy concerns. This study evaluates the accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5's answers to frequently asked questions about oral cancer, a condition where early diagnosis is crucial for improving patient outcomes. Methods A total of 20 questions were asked to ChatGPT-3.5, selected from Google Trends and questions asked by patients in the clinic. The responses provided by ChatGPT were evaluated for accuracy by medical oncologists and oral and maxillofacial radiologists. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using Fleiss’s and Cohen kappa tests. The scores given by the specialties were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. The references provided by ChatGPT-3.5 were evaluated for authenticity. Results Of the 80 responses from 20 questions, 41 (51.25%) were rated as very good, 37 (46.25%) as good, 2 (2.50%) as acceptable. There was no significant difference between oral and maxillofacial radiologists and medical oncologists in all 20 questions. Of the 81 references to ChatGPT-3.5 answers, only 13 were scientific articles, 10 were fake, and the remaining references were data from websites. Conclusion ChatGPT provided reliable information about oral cancer and did not provide incorrect information and suggestions. However, all information provided by ChatGPT is not based on real references.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05479-4AccuracyArtifical intelligenceChatGPTOral cancer |
| spellingShingle | Mesude Çi̇ti̇r ChatGPT and oral cancer: a study on informational reliability BMC Oral Health Accuracy Artifical intelligence ChatGPT Oral cancer |
| title | ChatGPT and oral cancer: a study on informational reliability |
| title_full | ChatGPT and oral cancer: a study on informational reliability |
| title_fullStr | ChatGPT and oral cancer: a study on informational reliability |
| title_full_unstemmed | ChatGPT and oral cancer: a study on informational reliability |
| title_short | ChatGPT and oral cancer: a study on informational reliability |
| title_sort | chatgpt and oral cancer a study on informational reliability |
| topic | Accuracy Artifical intelligence ChatGPT Oral cancer |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05479-4 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mesudecitir chatgptandoralcancerastudyoninformationalreliability |