TY - JOUR
T1 - ChatGPT vs. neurologists
T2 - a cross-sectional study investigating preference, satisfaction ratings and perceived empathy in responses among people living with multiple sclerosis
AU - Digital Technologies, Web, Social Media Study Group of the Italian Society of Neurology (SIN)
AU - Maida, Elisabetta
AU - Moccia, Marcello
AU - Palladino, Raffaele
AU - Borriello, Giovanna
AU - Affinito, Giuseppina
AU - Clerico, Marinella
AU - Repice, Anna Maria
AU - Di Sapio, Alessia
AU - Iodice, Rosa
AU - Spiezia, Antonio Luca
AU - Sparaco, Maddalena
AU - Miele, Giuseppina
AU - Bile, Floriana
AU - Scandurra, Cristiano
AU - Ferraro, Diana
AU - Stromillo, Maria Laura
AU - Docimo, Renato
AU - De Martino, Antonio
AU - Mancinelli, Luca
AU - Abbadessa, Gianmarco
AU - Smolik, Krzysztof
AU - Lorusso, Lorenzo
AU - Leone, Maurizio
AU - Leveraro, Elisa
AU - Lauro, Francesca
AU - Trojsi, Francesca
AU - Streito, Lidia Mislin
AU - Gabriele, Francesca
AU - Marinelli, Fabiana
AU - Ianniello, Antonio
AU - De Santis, Federica
AU - Foschi, Matteo
AU - De Stefano, Nicola
AU - Morra, Vincenzo Brescia
AU - Bisecco, Alvino
AU - Coghe, Giancarlo
AU - Cocco, Eleonora
AU - Romoli, Michele
AU - Corea, Francesco
AU - Leocani, Letizia
AU - Frau, Jessica
AU - Sacco, Simona
AU - Inglese, Matilde
AU - Carotenuto, Antonio
AU - Lanzillo, Roberta
AU - Padovani, Alessandro
AU - Triassi, Maria
AU - Bonavita, Simona
AU - Lavorgna, Luigi
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/7
Y1 - 2024/7
N2 - Background: ChatGPT is an open-source natural language processing software that replies to users’ queries. We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess people living with Multiple Sclerosis’ (PwMS) preferences, satisfaction, and empathy toward two alternate responses to four frequently-asked questions, one authored by a group of neurologists, the other by ChatGPT. Methods: An online form was sent through digital communication platforms. PwMS were blind to the author of each response and were asked to express their preference for each alternate response to the four questions. The overall satisfaction was assessed using a Likert scale (1–5); the Consultation and Relational Empathy scale was employed to assess perceived empathy. Results: We included 1133 PwMS (age, 45.26 ± 11.50 years; females, 68.49%). ChatGPT’s responses showed significantly higher empathy scores (Coeff = 1.38; 95% CI = 0.65, 2.11; p > z < 0.01), when compared with neurologists’ responses. No association was found between ChatGPT’ responses and mean satisfaction (Coeff = 0.03; 95% CI = − 0.01, 0.07; p = 0.157). College graduate, when compared with high school education responder, had significantly lower likelihood to prefer ChatGPT response (IRR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.79, 0.95; p < 0.01). Conclusions: ChatGPT-authored responses provided higher empathy than neurologists. Although AI holds potential, physicians should prepare to interact with increasingly digitized patients and guide them on responsible AI use. Future development should consider tailoring AIs’ responses to individual characteristics. Within the progressive digitalization of the population, ChatGPT could emerge as a helpful support in healthcare management rather than an alternative.
AB - Background: ChatGPT is an open-source natural language processing software that replies to users’ queries. We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess people living with Multiple Sclerosis’ (PwMS) preferences, satisfaction, and empathy toward two alternate responses to four frequently-asked questions, one authored by a group of neurologists, the other by ChatGPT. Methods: An online form was sent through digital communication platforms. PwMS were blind to the author of each response and were asked to express their preference for each alternate response to the four questions. The overall satisfaction was assessed using a Likert scale (1–5); the Consultation and Relational Empathy scale was employed to assess perceived empathy. Results: We included 1133 PwMS (age, 45.26 ± 11.50 years; females, 68.49%). ChatGPT’s responses showed significantly higher empathy scores (Coeff = 1.38; 95% CI = 0.65, 2.11; p > z < 0.01), when compared with neurologists’ responses. No association was found between ChatGPT’ responses and mean satisfaction (Coeff = 0.03; 95% CI = − 0.01, 0.07; p = 0.157). College graduate, when compared with high school education responder, had significantly lower likelihood to prefer ChatGPT response (IRR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.79, 0.95; p < 0.01). Conclusions: ChatGPT-authored responses provided higher empathy than neurologists. Although AI holds potential, physicians should prepare to interact with increasingly digitized patients and guide them on responsible AI use. Future development should consider tailoring AIs’ responses to individual characteristics. Within the progressive digitalization of the population, ChatGPT could emerge as a helpful support in healthcare management rather than an alternative.
KW - Artificial intelligence
KW - Large language model
KW - Machine learning
KW - Multiple sclerosis
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85189291490
U2 - 10.1007/s00415-024-12328-x
DO - 10.1007/s00415-024-12328-x
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85189291490
SN - 0340-5354
VL - 271
SP - 4057
EP - 4066
JO - Journal of Neurology
JF - Journal of Neurology
IS - 7
ER -