Bruno Pellozo Cerqueira1, Vinicius Cappellette da Silva Leite1, Carla Gonzaga França1, Fernando Sergio Leitão Filho2, Sonia Maria Faresin2, Ricardo Gassmann Figueiredo3, Andrea Antunes Cetlin4, Lilian Serrasqueiro Ballini Caetano2, José Baddini-Martinez2
ABSTRACT
Objective: To evaluate the quality of ChatGPT answers to asthma-related questions, as assessed from the perspectives of asthma specialists and laypersons. Methods: Seven asthma-related questions were asked to ChatGPT (version 4) between May 3, 2024 and May 4, 2024. The questions were standardized with no memory of previous conversations to avoid bias. Six pulmonologists with extensive expertise in asthma acted as judges, independently assessing the quality and reproducibility of the answers from the perspectives of asthma specialists and laypersons. A Likert scale ranging from 1 to 4 was used, and the content validity coefficient was calculated to assess the level of agreement among the judges. Results: The evaluations showed variability in the quality of the answers provided by ChatGPT. From the perspective of asthma specialists, the scores ranged from 2 to 3, with greater divergence in questions 2, 3, and 5. From the perspective of laypersons, the content validity coefficient exceeded 0.80 for four of the seven questions, with most answers being correct despite a lack of significant depth. Conclusions: Although ChatGPT performed well in providing answers to laypersons, the answers that it provided to specialists were less accurate and superficial. Although AI has the potential to provide useful information to the public, it should not replace medical guidance. Critical analysis of AI-generated information remains essential for health care professionals and laypersons alike, especially for complex conditions such as asthma.
Keywords: Asthma; Artificial intelligence; Pulmonologists
THE CONTENT OF THIS ARTICLE IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR THIS LANGUAGE.