Introduction: Cardiovascular diseases are the leading global cause of mortality, with ischemic heart disease representing a significant burden. Primary and secondary prevention strategies are essential to reduce the incidence and recurrence of acute myocardial infarction. Healthcare professionals are not the only information source for health education, but also the Internet, including tools offered by Artificial Intelligence. This study evaluates the accuracy and the readability of ChatGPT-generated information on cardiovascular risk prevention. Material and methods: An observational study was conducted to assess ChatGPT's responses to two tailored questions about acute myocardial infarction risk prevention, one focused on primary and the other on secondary prevention. Expert cardiologists evaluated the accuracy of each response using a Likert scale, while readability was assessed with the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES). Results: ChatGPT provided comprehensive and accurate responses for 15 out of 20 (75%) of the items. Readability scores were low, with median FRES indicating that both primary and secondary prevention content were difficult to understand. Specialized clinical topics exhibited lower accuracy and readability compared to the other topics. Discussion: The current study demonstrated that ChatGPT provided accurate information on primary and secondary prevention, although its readability was assessed as difficult. Conclusions: ChatGPT demonstrates promise as a resource for clinicians and patients in cardiovascular risk management. However, clinical oversight still remains critical to bridge gaps in accuracy and readability and ensure optimal patient outcomes.
Introduction: Cardiovascular diseases are the leading global cause of mortality, with ischemic heart disease representing a significant burden. Primary and secondary prevention strategies are essential to reduce the incidence and recurrence of acute myocardial infarction. Healthcare professionals are not the only information source for health education, but also the Internet, including tools offered by Artificial Intelligence. This study evaluates the accuracy and the readability of ChatGPT-generated information on cardiovascular risk prevention. Material and methods: An observational study was conducted to assess ChatGPT's responses to two tailored questions about acute myocardial infarction risk prevention, one focused on primary and the other on secondary prevention. Expert cardiologists evaluated the accuracy of each response using a Likert scale, while readability was assessed with the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES). Results: ChatGPT provided comprehensive and accurate responses for 15 out of 20 (75%) of the items. Readability scores were low, with median FRES indicating that both primary and secondary prevention content were difficult to understand. Specialized clinical topics exhibited lower accuracy and readability compared to the other topics. Discussion: The current study demonstrated that ChatGPT provided accurate information on primary and secondary prevention, although its readability was assessed as difficult. Conclusions: ChatGPT demonstrates promise as a resource for clinicians and patients in cardiovascular risk management. However, clinical oversight still remains critical to bridge gaps in accuracy and readability and ensure optimal patient outcomes.
ChatGPT in cardiovascular risk management: a study on AI’s contribution to primary and secondary prevention of acute myocardial infarction
ZANOTTO, CAMILLA
2023/2024
Abstract
Introduction: Cardiovascular diseases are the leading global cause of mortality, with ischemic heart disease representing a significant burden. Primary and secondary prevention strategies are essential to reduce the incidence and recurrence of acute myocardial infarction. Healthcare professionals are not the only information source for health education, but also the Internet, including tools offered by Artificial Intelligence. This study evaluates the accuracy and the readability of ChatGPT-generated information on cardiovascular risk prevention. Material and methods: An observational study was conducted to assess ChatGPT's responses to two tailored questions about acute myocardial infarction risk prevention, one focused on primary and the other on secondary prevention. Expert cardiologists evaluated the accuracy of each response using a Likert scale, while readability was assessed with the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES). Results: ChatGPT provided comprehensive and accurate responses for 15 out of 20 (75%) of the items. Readability scores were low, with median FRES indicating that both primary and secondary prevention content were difficult to understand. Specialized clinical topics exhibited lower accuracy and readability compared to the other topics. Discussion: The current study demonstrated that ChatGPT provided accurate information on primary and secondary prevention, although its readability was assessed as difficult. Conclusions: ChatGPT demonstrates promise as a resource for clinicians and patients in cardiovascular risk management. However, clinical oversight still remains critical to bridge gaps in accuracy and readability and ensure optimal patient outcomes.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Zanotto_Camilla.pdf
accesso riservato
Dimensione
756.79 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
756.79 kB | Adobe PDF |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/78608