ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: ChatGPT has recently emerged as a novel resource for patients' disease-specific inquiries. There is, however, limited evidence assessing the quality of the information. We evaluated the accuracy and quality of the ChatGPT's responses on male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of benign prostate enlargement (BPE) when compared to two reference resources. METHODS: Using patient information websites from the European Association of Urology and the American Urological Association as reference material, we formulated 88 BPE-centric questions for ChatGPT 4.0+. Independently and in duplicate, we compared the ChatGPT's responses and the reference material, calculating accuracy through F1 score, precision, and recall metrics. We used a 5-point Likert scale for quality rating. We evaluated examiner agreement using the interclass correlation coefficient and assessed the difference in the quality scores with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: ChatGPT addressed all (88/88) LUTS/BPE-related questions. For the 88 questions, the recorded F1 score was 0.79 (range: 0-1), precision 0.66 (range: 0-1), recall 0.97 (range: 0-1), and the quality score had a median of 4 (range = 1-5). Examiners had a good level of agreement (ICC = 0.86). We found no statistically significant difference between the scores given by the examiners and the overall quality of the responses (p = 0.72). DISCUSSION: ChatGPT demostrated a potential utility in educating patients about BPE/LUTS, its prognosis, and treatment that helps in the decision-making process. One must exercise prudence when recommending this as the sole information outlet. Additional studies are needed to completely understand the full extent of AI's efficacy in delivering patient education in urology.
ABSTRACT
Network meta-analysis (NMA) expands upon traditional meta-analysis by integrating three or more interventions. This allows comparing interventions using evidence from trials that have compared pairs of interventions directly, and indirect evidence through common comparators. We provide an overview of NMA concepts and considerations when interpreting results from a systematic review with a NMA and applying them to clinical practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: Network meta-analysis is a statistical tool that allows researchers to compare multiple treatments for a medical condition at once, even when treatments have not been compared to each other in research studies. This mini-review explains how to read a network meta-analysis and apply its results in patient care.
Subject(s)
Network Meta-Analysis , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Meta-Analysis as TopicABSTRACT
Introduction: Solid organ transplantation is a lifesaving intervention requiring extensive coordination and communication for timely and safe care. The COVID-19 pandemic posed unique challenges to the safety and management of solid organ transplantation. This descriptive qualitative study aimed to understand how hospital stakeholders were affected by and responded to the COVID-19 pandemic to contribute toward improved healthcare delivery responses and strategies during times of systemic strain on the healthcare system. Methods: One-hour-long semistructured interviews were performed in 3 cohorts: healthcare professionals (N = 6), administrative staff (N = 6), and recipients (N = 4). Interviews were analyzed using conventional thematic content analysis. Thematic saturation was reached within each cohort. Findings: Twelve codes and 6 major themes were identified including the Impact on Clinical Practice, Virtual Healthcare Delivery, Communication, Research, Education and Training, Mental Health and Future Pandemic Planning. Reflecting on these codes and major themes, 4 recommendations were developed (Anticipation and Preparation, Maximizing Existing Resources and Networks, Standardization and the Virtual Environment and Caring for the Staff) to guide transplant programs to optimize healthcare pathways while enhancing the best practices during future pandemics. Conclusion: Transplant programs will benefit from anticipation and preparation procedures using ramping-down strategies, resource planning, and interprofessional collaboration while maximizing existing resources and networks. In parallel, transplant programs should standardize virtual practices and platforms for clinical and educational purposes while maintaining an open culture of mental health discussion and integrating strategies to support staff's mental health.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Organ Transplantation , Transplants , Humans , Pandemics , Educational Status , Qualitative ResearchABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To examine: (1) the psychometric properties of two therapist competence measures-multiple choice questionnaire (MCQ) and standardized role-plays; (2) whether therapist competence differed between non-specialist (NSPs) and specialist (SPs) providers; and (3) the relations between therapist competence and patient outcomes among perinatal patients receiving brief psychotherapy. METHODS: This study is embedded within the SUMMIT Trial-a large, ongoing psychotherapy trial for perinatal women with depressive and anxiety symptoms. We assessed the: (1) psychometric properties of therapist competence measures using Cronbach's alpha and inter-class correlation; (2) differences in therapist competence scores between nâ¯=â¯23 NSPs and nâ¯=â¯22 SPs using a two-sample t-test; and (3) relations between therapist competence measures and perinatal patient outcomes through a linear regression model. RESULTS: Internal consistency for role-play was acceptable (αâ¯=â¯0.71), whereas MCQ was excellent (αâ¯=â¯0.97). Role-play showed good inter-rater reliability (ICCâ¯=â¯0.80) and scores were higher for SPs compared with NSPs (t(2,38)â¯=â¯-2.86, pâ¯=â¯0.0069) and associated with outcomes of anxiety (Bâ¯=â¯1.52, SEâ¯=â¯0.60, pâ¯=â¯0.01) and depressive (Bâ¯=â¯0.96, SEâ¯=â¯0.55, pâ¯=â¯0.08) symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the importance of demonstrating psychological treatment skills through standardized role-plays over knowledge-based competence to predict perinatal patient outcomes. Using well-defined evidence-based tools is critical for deploying NSPs to provide high-quality psychotherapy and increase accessibility to psychological treatments for perinatal populations worldwide.
Subject(s)
Depression , Psychotherapy , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Anxiety , Anxiety Disorders/therapy , Depression/therapy , Depression/psychology , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
During the COVID-19 pandemic, outpatient psychotherapy transitioned to telemedicine. This study aimed to examine barriers and facilitators to resuming in-person psychotherapy with perinatal patients as the pandemic abates. We conducted focus group and individual interviews with a sample of perinatal participants (n = 23), psychotherapy providers (n = 28), and stakeholders (n = 18) from Canada and the U.S. involved in the SUMMIT trial, which is aimed at improving access to mental healthcare for perinatal patients with depression and anxiety. Content analysis was used to examine perceived barriers and facilitators. Reported barriers included concerns about virus exposure in a hospital setting (77.8% stakeholders, 73.9% perinatal participants, 71.4% providers) or on public transportation (50.0% stakeholders, 26.1% perinatal participants, 25.0% providers), wearing a mask during sessions (50.0% stakeholders, 25.0% providers, 13.0% participants), lack of childcare (66.7% stakeholders, 46.4% providers, 43.5% perinatal participants), general transportation barriers (50.0% stakeholders, 47.8% perinatal participants, 25.0% providers), and the burden of planning and making time for in-person sessions (35.7% providers, 34.8% perinatal participants, 27.8% stakeholders). Reported facilitators included implementing and communicating safety protocols (72.2% stakeholders, 47.8% perinatal participants, 39.3% providers), conducting sessions at alternative or larger locations (44.4% stakeholders, 32.1% providers, 17.4% perinatal participants), providing incentives (34.8% perinatal participants, 21.4% providers, 11.1% stakeholders), and childcare and flexible scheduling options (31.1% perinatal participants, 16.7% stakeholders). This study identified a number of potential barriers and illustrated that COVID-19 has fostered and amplified barriers. Future interventions to facilitate resuming in-person sessions should focus on patient-centered strategies based on empathy regarding ongoing risk-aversion among perinatal patients despite existing safety protocols, and holistic thinking to make access to in-person psychotherapy easier and more accessible for perinatal patients.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Female , Humans , Parturition , Pregnancy , Psychotherapy , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Variability in the results of randomized trials presents challenges to the interpretation and application of the evidence to patient care. Understanding how systematic reviews deal with this problem of "heterogeneity" will help clinicians in applying results in their patient management. This manuscript offers a review of heterogeneity from the clinical urological perspective. PATIENT SUMMARY: Systematic reviews of the literature are necessary to accurately summarize the available evidence to inform clinical decisions. In this mini-review, we explain how to understand and deal with the differences between studies-which we call heterogeneity-included in these types of reviews.