Pilot Testing of a Tool to Standardize the Assessment of the Quality of Health Information Generated by Artificial Intelligence-Based Models
Copyright © 2023, Sallam et al..
Background Artificial intelligence (AI)-based conversational models, such as Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT), Microsoft Bing, and Google Bard, have emerged as valuable sources of health information for lay individuals. However, the accuracy of the information provided by these AI models remains a significant concern. This pilot study aimed to test a new tool with key themes for inclusion as follows: Completeness of content, Lack of false information in the content, Evidence supporting the content, Appropriateness of the content, and Relevance, referred to as "CLEAR", designed to assess the quality of health information delivered by AI-based models. Methods Tool development involved a literature review on health information quality, followed by the initial establishment of the CLEAR tool, which comprised five items that aimed to assess the following: completeness, lack of false information, evidence support, appropriateness, and relevance. Each item was scored on a five-point Likert scale from excellent to poor. Content validity was checked by expert review. Pilot testing involved 32 healthcare professionals using the CLEAR tool to assess content on eight different health topics deliberately designed with varying qualities. The internal consistency was checked with Cronbach's alpha (α). Feedback from the pilot test resulted in language modifications to improve the clarity of the items. The final CLEAR tool was used to assess the quality of health information generated by four distinct AI models on five health topics. The AI models were ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4, Microsoft Bing, and Google Bard, and the content generated was scored by two independent raters with Cohen's kappa (κ) for inter-rater agreement. Results The final five CLEAR items were: (1) Is the content sufficient?; (2) Is the content accurate?; (3) Is the content evidence-based?; (4) Is the content clear, concise, and easy to understand?; and (5) Is the content free from irrelevant information? Pilot testing on the eight health topics revealed acceptable internal consistency with a Cronbach's α range of 0.669-0.981. The use of the final CLEAR tool yielded the following average scores: Microsoft Bing (mean=24.4±0.42), ChatGPT-4 (mean=23.6±0.96), Google Bard (mean=21.2±1.79), and ChatGPT-3.5 (mean=20.6±5.20). The inter-rater agreement revealed the following Cohen κ values: for ChatGPT-3.5 (κ=0.875, P<.001), ChatGPT-4 (κ=0.780, P<.001), Microsoft Bing (κ=0.348, P=.037), and Google Bard (κ=.749, P<.001). Conclusions The CLEAR tool is a brief yet helpful tool that can aid in standardizing testing of the quality of health information generated by AI-based models. Future studies are recommended to validate the utility of the CLEAR tool in the quality assessment of AI-generated health-related content using a larger sample across various complex health topics.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:15 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Cureus - 15(2023), 11 vom: 20. Nov., Seite e49373 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Sallam, Malik [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Ai in healthcare |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 01.12.2023 published: Electronic-eCollection Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.7759/cureus.49373 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM365152188 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM365152188 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226101050.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.7759/cureus.49373 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1217.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM365152188 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38024074 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Sallam, Malik |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Pilot Testing of a Tool to Standardize the Assessment of the Quality of Health Information Generated by Artificial Intelligence-Based Models |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 01.12.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic-eCollection | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2023, Sallam et al. | ||
| 520 | |a Background Artificial intelligence (AI)-based conversational models, such as Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT), Microsoft Bing, and Google Bard, have emerged as valuable sources of health information for lay individuals. However, the accuracy of the information provided by these AI models remains a significant concern. This pilot study aimed to test a new tool with key themes for inclusion as follows: Completeness of content, Lack of false information in the content, Evidence supporting the content, Appropriateness of the content, and Relevance, referred to as "CLEAR", designed to assess the quality of health information delivered by AI-based models. Methods Tool development involved a literature review on health information quality, followed by the initial establishment of the CLEAR tool, which comprised five items that aimed to assess the following: completeness, lack of false information, evidence support, appropriateness, and relevance. Each item was scored on a five-point Likert scale from excellent to poor. Content validity was checked by expert review. Pilot testing involved 32 healthcare professionals using the CLEAR tool to assess content on eight different health topics deliberately designed with varying qualities. The internal consistency was checked with Cronbach's alpha (α). Feedback from the pilot test resulted in language modifications to improve the clarity of the items. The final CLEAR tool was used to assess the quality of health information generated by four distinct AI models on five health topics. The AI models were ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4, Microsoft Bing, and Google Bard, and the content generated was scored by two independent raters with Cohen's kappa (κ) for inter-rater agreement. Results The final five CLEAR items were: (1) Is the content sufficient?; (2) Is the content accurate?; (3) Is the content evidence-based?; (4) Is the content clear, concise, and easy to understand?; and (5) Is the content free from irrelevant information? Pilot testing on the eight health topics revealed acceptable internal consistency with a Cronbach's α range of 0.669-0.981. The use of the final CLEAR tool yielded the following average scores: Microsoft Bing (mean=24.4±0.42), ChatGPT-4 (mean=23.6±0.96), Google Bard (mean=21.2±1.79), and ChatGPT-3.5 (mean=20.6±5.20). The inter-rater agreement revealed the following Cohen κ values: for ChatGPT-3.5 (κ=0.875, P<.001), ChatGPT-4 (κ=0.780, P<.001), Microsoft Bing (κ=0.348, P=.037), and Google Bard (κ=.749, P<.001). Conclusions The CLEAR tool is a brief yet helpful tool that can aid in standardizing testing of the quality of health information generated by AI-based models. Future studies are recommended to validate the utility of the CLEAR tool in the quality assessment of AI-generated health-related content using a larger sample across various complex health topics | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a ai in healthcare | |
| 650 | 4 | |a ai-generated health information | |
| 650 | 4 | |a assessment tool feasibility | |
| 650 | 4 | |a health information reliability | |
| 650 | 4 | |a quality of health information | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Barakat, Muna |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Sallam, Mohammed |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Cureus |d 2013 |g 15(2023), 11 vom: 20. Nov., Seite e49373 |w (DE-627)NLM24118083X |x 2168-8184 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:15 |g year:2023 |g number:11 |g day:20 |g month:11 |g pages:e49373 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.49373 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 15 |j 2023 |e 11 |b 20 |c 11 |h e49373 | ||