Cited by 69Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Doctor Versus Artificial Intelligence: Patient and Physician Evaluation of Large Language Model Responses to Rheumatology Patient Questions in a Cross‐Sectional Study

Open access
Ye, Carrie, Zweck, Elric, Ma, Zechen, Smith, Justin, Katz, Steven·2024·Arthritis & Rheumatology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the current study was to assess the quality of large language model (LLM) chatbot versus physician-generated responses to patient-generated rheumatology questions. METHODS: We conducted a single-center cross-sectional survey of rheumatology patients (n = 17) in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Patients evaluated LLM chatbot versus physician-generated responses for comprehensiveness and readability, with four rheumatologists also evaluating accuracy by using a Likert scale from 1 to 10 (1 being poor, 10 being excellent). RESULTS: Patients rated no significant difference between artificial intelligence (AI) and physician-generated responses in comprehensiveness (mean 7.12 ± SD 0.99 vs 7.52 ± 1.16; P = 0.1962) or readability (7.90 ± 0.90 vs 7.80 ± 0.75; P = 0.5905). Rheumatologists rated AI responses significantly poorer than physician responses on comprehensiveness (AI 5.52 ± 2.13 vs physician 8.76 ± 1.07; P < 0.0001), readability (AI 7.85 ± 0.92 vs physician 8.75 ± 0.57; P = 0.0003), and accuracy (AI 6.48 ± 2.07 vs physician 9.08 ± 0.64; P < 0.0001). The proportion of preference to AI- versus physician-generated responses by patients and physicians was 0.45 ± 0.18 and 0.15 ± 0.08, respectively (P = 0.0106). After learning that one answer for each question was AI generated, patients were able to correctly identify AI-generated answers at a lower proportion compared to physicians (0.49 ± 0.26 vs 0.97 ± 0.04; P = 0.0183). The average word count of AI answers was 69.10 ± 25.35 words, as compared to 98.83 ± 34.58 words for physician-generated responses (P = 0.0008). CONCLUSION: Rheumatology patients rated AI-generated responses to patient questions similarly to physician-generated responses in terms of comprehensiveness, readability, and overall preference. However, rheumatologists rated AI responses significantly poorer than physician-generated responses, suggesting that LLM chatbot responses are inferior to physician responses, a difference that patients may not be aware of.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/art.42737

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ye, C., Zweck, E., Ma, Z., Smith, J., & Katz, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Düsseldorf University Hospital (DE)
Corresponding author
Ye, Carrie
Venue
Arthritis & Rheumatology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-01-18
Volume
76
Issue
3
Pages
479-484
ISSN
  • 2326-5191 (ISSN-L)
  • 2326-5205
OpenAlex
W4388014118
Cited by
69
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 2
FWCI
2.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Arthritis & Rheumatology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
large language models, AI chatbots, patient satisfaction, readability, response accuracy, patient-physician communication, artificial intelligence in healthcare, rheumatology patients
MeSH terms
Alberta, Artificial Intelligence, Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Language, Physicians, Rheumatology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review