Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
ChatGPT‐4o Compared With Human Researchers in Writing Plain‐Language Summaries for Cochrane Reviews: A Blinded, Randomized Non‐Inferiority Controlled Trial
2
Zitationen
3
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
Introduction: Plain language summaries in Cochrane reviews are designed to present key information in a way that is understandable to individuals without a medical background. Despite Cochrane's author guidelines, these summaries often fail to achieve their intended purpose. Studies show that they are generally difficult to read and vary in their adherence to the guidelines. Artificial intelligence is increasingly used in medicine and academia, with its potential being tested in various roles. This study aimed to investigate whether ChatGPT-4o could produce plain language summaries that are as good as the already published plain language summaries in Cochrane reviews. Methods: We conducted a randomized, single-blinded study with a total of 36 plain language summaries: 18 human written and 18 ChatGPT-4o generated summaries where both versions were for the same Cochrane reviews. The sample size was calculated to be 36 and each summary was evaluated four times. Each summary was reviewed twice by members of a Cochrane editorial group and twice by laypersons. The summaries were assessed in three different ways: First, all assessors evaluated the summaries for informativeness, readability, and level of detail using a Likert scale from 1 to 10. They were also asked whether they would submit the summary and whether they could identify who had written it. Second, members of a Cochrane editorial group assessed the summaries using a checklist based on Cochrane's guidelines for plain language summaries, with scores ranging from 0 to 10. Finally, the readability of the summaries was analyzed using objective tools such as Lix and Flesch-Kincaid scores. Randomization and allocation to either ChatGPT-4o or human written summaries were conducted using random.org's random sequence generator, and assessors were blinded to the authorship of the summaries. Results: < .001). Conclusion: ChatGPT-4o shows promise in creating plain language summaries for Cochrane reviews at least as well as humans and in some cases slightly better. This study suggests ChatGPT-4o's could become a tool for drafting easy-to-understand plain language summaries for Cochrane reviews with a quality approaching or matching human authors. Clinical Trial Registration and Protocol: Available at https://osf.io/aq6r5.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.644 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.550 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 8.061 Zit.
BioBERT: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining
2019 · 6.850 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.781 Zit.