Public articles linked to the same research event.
JB & JS open access This systematic review searched PubMed and Embase (July 9, 2025) and included 23 studies to assess generative AI, mainly ChatGPT 3.5/4, in total hip and knee arthroplasty across patient communication and education (n=19), clinical documentation (n=2), and clinical decision support (n=2): blinded ratings found FAQ responses comparable to surgeon-written answers in accuracy, clarity, and completeness with better readability; consent documents showed better readability and completeness than surgeon versions; operative-report extraction reached 97.5%–100% agreement; decision support showed higher accuracy for surgical candidacy but low specificity for outcome prediction, alongside fabricated citations and limited patient trust.
This systematic review searched PubMed and Embase (July 9, 2025) and included 23 studies to assess generative AI, mainly ChatGPT 3.5/4, in total hip and knee arthroplasty across patient communication and education (n=19), clinical documentation (n=2), and clinical decision support (n=2): blinded ratings found FAQ responses comparable to surgeon-written answers in accuracy, clarity, and completeness with better readability; consent documents showed better readability and completeness than surgeon versions; operative-report extraction reached 97.5%–100% agreement; decision support showed higher accuracy for surgical candidacy but low specificity for outcome prediction, alongside fabricated citations and limited patient trust.
This systematic review searched PubMed and Embase (July 9, 2025) and included 23 studies to assess generative AI, mainly ChatGPT 3.5/4, in total hip and knee arthroplasty across patient communication and education (n=19), clinical documentation (n=2), and clinical decision support (n=2): blinded ratings found FAQ responses comparable to surgeon-written answers in accuracy, clarity, and completeness with better readability; consent documents showed better readability and completeness than surgeon versions; operative-report extraction reached 97.5%–100% agreement; decision support showed higher accuracy for surgical candidacy but low specificity for outcome prediction, alongside fabricated citations and limited patient trust.
This systematic review searched PubMed and Embase (July 9, 2025) and included 23 studies to assess generative AI, mainly ChatGPT 3.5/4, in total hip and knee arthroplasty across patient communication and education (n=19), clinical documentation (n=2), and clinical decision support (n=2): blinded ratings found FAQ responses comparable to surgeon-written answers in accuracy, clarity, and completeness with better readability; consent documents showed better readability and completeness than surgeon versions; operative-report extraction reached 97.5%–100% agreement; decision support showed higher accuracy for surgical candidacy but low specificity for outcome prediction, alongside fabricated citations and limited patient trust.