ArticleEJVES vascular forum2024
Open E-survey on the Use and Perception of Chatbots in Vascular Surgery.
Article in EJVES vascular forum, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Chatbots Best Left in the Vascular Clinic Waiting Room…for Now.EJVES vascular forum · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Large language models and artificial intelligence (AI) based chatbots have brought new insights in healthcare, but they also raise major concerns. Their applications in vascular surgery have scarcely been investigated to date. This international survey aimed to evaluate the perceptions and feedback from vascular surgeons on the use of AI chatbots in vascular surgery. Methods: This international open e-survey comprised 50 items that covered participant characteristics, their perceptions on the use of AI chatbots in vascular surgery, and their user experience. The study was designed in accordance with the Checklist for reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys and was critically reviewed and approved by international members of the European Vascular Research Collaborative (EVRC) prior to distribution. Participation was open to self reported health professionals specialised (or specialising) in vascular surgery, including residents or fellows. Results: Of the 342 individuals who visited the survey page, 318 (93%) agreed to participate; 262 (82.4%) finished the survey and were included in the analysis. Most were consultants or attending physicians (64.1%), most declared not having any training or education related to AI in healthcare (221; 84.4%), and 198 (75.6%) rated their knowledge about the abilities of AI chatbots between average to very poor. Interestingly, 95 participants (36.3%) found that AI chatbots were very useful or somewhat useful in clinical practice at this stage and 229 (87.4%) agreed that they should be systematically validated prior to being used. Eighty participants (30.5%) had specifically tested it for questions related to clinical practice and 59 (73.8%) of them experienced issues or limitations. Conclusion: This international survey provides an overview of perceptions of AI chatbots by vascular surgeons and highlights the need to improve knowledge and training of health professionals to better evaluate, define, and implement their use in vascular surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.