Page 35 - Read Online

Page 123 Koss et al. Art Int Surg. 2025;5:116-25 https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/ais.2024.91

inaccurate data through attention-check questions and Prolific’s required demographic verification. Our
survey was not exhaustive and did not offer the opportunity for detailed responses such as reasons for
ranking ChatGPT lower than other sources. However, the diversity of our sample, in terms of gender
identity and racial background, provides a valuable snapshot of the current landscape of information-
seeking behaviors among transgender and gender-diverse individuals considering GAS.

The implications of this study extend beyond the immediate context of GAS. As LLMs become more
integrated into the larger healthcare landscape, it is essential for researchers and clinicians to continually
assess their utility in various fields, particularly those that require high levels of personalization and patient-
centered care. At the time of the study, ChatGPT was not a primary resource for participants seeking
information about GAS. However, among those who utilized it, the platform was generally well-
recommended. As AI technology continues to gain popularity, it is likely that its use for sourcing
information about GAS will increase. Future research should investigate how ChatGPT and other LLMs can
be adapted to better address the needs of patients considering complex medical procedures. This may
involve incorporating multimedia features, such as video explanations or interactive Q&A formats, to
improve user engagement and build trust. Additionally, future studies should aim to increase sample sizes
and include more diverse populations to provide a more comprehensive understanding of patient education
within complex surgical domains. Including definitions of key terms for participants in future surveys could
also help minimize variability in understanding and improve consistency in responses.

In conclusion, this study found that ChatGPT was underutilized as a resource for information on GAS,
though it had a positive impact on patient education and provided useful information for those who did use
it. Participants rated ChatGPT as moderately helpful but identified gaps in areas such as financial
considerations, surgical techniques, and recovery details. These findings highlight that while ChatGPT
shows promise as a supplementary resource for patients considering GAS, it is not yet perceived as a
primary source of reliable information. Given the critical need for trustworthy and comprehensive guidance
during the decision-making process for GAS, this emphasizes the importance of steering patients toward
more trusted, human-centered resources, while continuing to refine language models to better meet the
needs of diverse patient populations.

DECLARATIONS
Authors’ contributions
Made substantial contributions to data analysis, manuscript drafting, and manuscript revision: Koss MR
Made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study, data acquisition, and manuscript
revision: McLaughlin M
Made substantial contributions to data analysis: Switalla K
Made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study, manuscript revision, and
technical support: Falade I
Made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study, as well as providing
administrative support: Kim E

Availability of data and materials
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon
reasonable request.

Financial support and sponsorship
The study was funded by the personal funds of the Principal Investigator. These funds were used to
compensate participants for their time via the Prolific research platform. The authors declared no external