TY - JOUR
T1 - ChatGPT and its Role in the Decision-Making for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
T2 - A Comparative Analysis and Narrative Review
AU - Rajjoub, Rami
AU - Arroyave, Juan Sebastian
AU - Zaidat, Bashar
AU - Ahmed, Wasil
AU - Mejia, Mateo Restrepo
AU - Tang, Justin
AU - Kim, Jun S.
AU - Cho, Samuel K.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2023.
PY - 2024/4
Y1 - 2024/4
N2 - Study Design: Comparative Analysis and Narrative Review. Objective: To assess and compare ChatGPT’s responses to the clinical questions and recommendations proposed by The 2011 North American Spine Society (NASS) Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS). We explore the advantages and disadvantages of ChatGPT’s responses through an updated literature review on spinal stenosis. Methods: We prompted ChatGPT with questions from the NASS Evidence-based Clinical Guidelines for LSS and compared its generated responses with the recommendations provided by the guidelines. A review of the literature was performed via PubMed, OVID, and Cochrane on the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis between January 2012 and April 2023. Results: 14 questions proposed by the NASS guidelines for LSS were uploaded into ChatGPT and directly compared to the responses offered by NASS. Three questions were on the definition and history of LSS, one on diagnostic tests, seven on non-surgical interventions and three on surgical interventions. The review process found 40 articles that were selected for inclusion that helped corroborate or contradict the responses that were generated by ChatGPT. Conclusions: ChatGPT’s responses were similar to findings in the current literature on LSS. These results demonstrate the potential for implementing ChatGPT into the spine surgeon’s workplace as a means of supporting the decision-making process for LSS diagnosis and treatment. However, our narrative summary only provides a limited literature review and additional research is needed to standardize our findings as means of validating ChatGPT’s use in the clinical space.
AB - Study Design: Comparative Analysis and Narrative Review. Objective: To assess and compare ChatGPT’s responses to the clinical questions and recommendations proposed by The 2011 North American Spine Society (NASS) Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS). We explore the advantages and disadvantages of ChatGPT’s responses through an updated literature review on spinal stenosis. Methods: We prompted ChatGPT with questions from the NASS Evidence-based Clinical Guidelines for LSS and compared its generated responses with the recommendations provided by the guidelines. A review of the literature was performed via PubMed, OVID, and Cochrane on the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis between January 2012 and April 2023. Results: 14 questions proposed by the NASS guidelines for LSS were uploaded into ChatGPT and directly compared to the responses offered by NASS. Three questions were on the definition and history of LSS, one on diagnostic tests, seven on non-surgical interventions and three on surgical interventions. The review process found 40 articles that were selected for inclusion that helped corroborate or contradict the responses that were generated by ChatGPT. Conclusions: ChatGPT’s responses were similar to findings in the current literature on LSS. These results demonstrate the potential for implementing ChatGPT into the spine surgeon’s workplace as a means of supporting the decision-making process for LSS diagnosis and treatment. However, our narrative summary only provides a limited literature review and additional research is needed to standardize our findings as means of validating ChatGPT’s use in the clinical space.
KW - artificial intelligence
KW - clinical guidelines
KW - decision-making
KW - large language models
KW - lumbar stenosis
KW - spine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85167623905&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/21925682231195783
DO - 10.1177/21925682231195783
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85167623905
SN - 2192-5682
VL - 14
SP - 998
EP - 1017
JO - Global Spine Journal
JF - Global Spine Journal
IS - 3
ER -