Comparison of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots (ChatGPT vs Google Gemini) for Informed Consent Quality: A Cross-sectional Evaluation

Abstract

Background and aims: Obtaining informed consent (IC) for tracheostomy is a frequent and essential process in the intensive care unit (ICU). With the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in health care, chatbots such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (GG) are being explored as potential tools to assist in drafting IC documents. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, IC drafts for tracheostomy were generated by ChatGPT and GG. Fifteen experienced intensivists independently evaluated these drafts for accuracy, completeness, readability, and sentiment. Readability was measured using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score, while sentiment analysis assessed the emotional tone of the text. Results: No statistically significant differences were observed in terms of accuracy or completeness between the two chatbots. The inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation (ICC). The ICC for completeness and accuracy ratings between ChatGPT and GG were 0.85 (95% CI: 0.75-0.92) and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.68-0.89), respectively, suggesting excellent to good inter-rater reliability between the two Chatbots. However, ChatGPT drafts had higher FRE scores (76.46 vs 60.04), indicating better readability. Sentiment analysis revealed that both drafts were predominantly neutral, with GG incorporating slightly more positive expressions. Conclusion: Both ChatGPT and GG can generate clinically appropriate IC content for tracheostomy. ChatGPT appears to have an advantage in producing more readable and patient-friendly material, highlighting its potential utility in clinical communication. How to cite this article: Chilkoti GT, Jain S, Gondode PG. Comparison of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots (ChatGPT vs Google Gemini) for Informed Consent Quality: A Cross-sectional Evaluation. Indian J Crit Care Med 2025;29(11):967-969.

Ähnliche Arbeiten