BACKGROUND: Patients find technology tools to be more approachable for seeking sensitive health-related information, such as reproductive health information. The inventive conversational ability of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, such as ChatGPT (OpenAI Inc), offers a potential means for patients to effectively locate answers to their health-related questions digitally.
OBJECTIVE: A pilot study was conducted to compare the novel ChatGPT with the existing Google Search technology for their ability to offer accurate, effective, and current information regarding proceeding action after missing a dose of oral contraceptive pill.
METHODS: A sequence of 11 questions, mimicking a patient inquiring about the action to take after missing a dose of an oral contraceptive pill, were input into ChatGPT as a cascade, given the conversational ability of ChatGPT. The questions were input into 4 different ChatGPT accounts, with the account holders being of various demographics, to evaluate potential differences and biases in the responses given to different account holders. The leading question, \"what should I do if I missed a day of my oral contraception birth control?\" alone was then input into Google Search, given its nonconversational nature. The results from the ChatGPT questions and the Google Search results for the leading question were evaluated on their readability, accuracy, and effective delivery of information.
RESULTS: The ChatGPT results were determined to be at an overall higher-grade reading level, with a longer reading duration, less accurate, less current, and with a less effective delivery of information. In contrast, the Google Search resulting answer box and snippets were at a lower-grade reading level, shorter reading duration, more current, able to reference the origin of the information (transparent), and provided the information in various formats in addition to text.
CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT has room for improvement in accuracy, transparency, recency, and reliability before it can equitably be implemented into health care information delivery and provide the potential benefits it poses. However, AI may be used as a tool for providers to educate their patients in preferred, creative, and efficient ways, such as using AI to generate accessible short educational videos from health care provider-vetted information. Larger studies representing a diverse group of users are needed.

BACKGROUND: Large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT (Open AI), are increasingly used in medicine and supplement standard search engines as information sources. This leads to more \"consultations\" of LLMs about personal medical symptoms.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate ChatGPT\'s performance in answering clinical case-based questions in otorhinolaryngology (ORL) in comparison to ORL consultants\' answers.
METHODS: We used 41 case-based questions from established ORL study books and past German state examinations for doctors. The questions were answered by both ORL consultants and ChatGPT 3. ORL consultants rated all responses, except their own, on medical adequacy, conciseness, coherence, and comprehensibility using a 6-point Likert scale. They also identified (in a blinded setting) if the answer was created by an ORL consultant or ChatGPT. Additionally, the character count was compared. Due to the rapidly evolving pace of technology, a comparison between responses generated by ChatGPT 3 and ChatGPT 4 was included to give an insight into the evolving potential of LLMs.
RESULTS: Ratings in all categories were significantly higher for ORL consultants (P<.001). Although inferior to the scores of the ORL consultants, ChatGPT\'s scores were relatively higher in semantic categories (conciseness, coherence, and comprehensibility) compared to medical adequacy. ORL consultants identified ChatGPT as the source correctly in 98.4% (121/123) of cases. ChatGPT\'s answers had a significantly higher character count compared to ORL consultants (P<.001). Comparison between responses generated by ChatGPT 3 and ChatGPT 4 showed a slight improvement in medical accuracy as well as a better coherence of the answers provided. Contrarily, neither the conciseness (P=.06) nor the comprehensibility (P=.08) improved significantly despite the significant increase in the mean amount of characters by 52.5% (n= (1470-964)/964; P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS: While ChatGPT provided longer answers to medical problems, medical adequacy and conciseness were significantly lower compared to ORL consultants\' answers. LLMs have potential as augmentative tools for medical care, but their \"consultation\" for medical problems carries a high risk of misinformation as their high semantic quality may mask contextual deficits.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of child and adolescent mental health issues is increasing faster than the number of services available, leading to a shortfall. Mental health chatbots are a highly scalable method to address this gap. Manage Your Life Online (MYLO) is an artificially intelligent chatbot that emulates the method of levels therapy. Method of levels is a therapy that uses curious questioning to support the sustained awareness and exploration of current problems.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a co-designed interface for MYLO in young people aged 16 to 24 years with mental health problems.
METHODS: An iterative co-design phase occurred over 4 months, in which feedback was elicited from a group of young people (n=7) with lived experiences of mental health issues. This resulted in the development of a progressive web application version of MYLO that could be used on mobile phones. We conducted a case series to assess the feasibility and acceptability of MYLO in 13 young people over 2 weeks. During this time, the participants tested MYLO and completed surveys including clinical outcomes and acceptability measures. We then conducted focus groups and interviews and used thematic analysis to obtain feedback on MYLO and identify recommendations for further improvements.
RESULTS: Most participants were positive about their experience of using MYLO and would recommend MYLO to others. The participants enjoyed the simplicity of the interface, found it easy to use, and rated it as acceptable using the System Usability Scale. Inspection of the use data found evidence that MYLO can learn and adapt its questioning in response to user input. We found a large effect size for the decrease in participants\' problem-related distress and a medium effect size for the increase in their self-reported tendency to resolve goal conflicts (the proposed mechanism of change) in the testing phase. Some patients also experienced a reliable change in their clinical outcome measures over the 2 weeks.
CONCLUSIONS: We established the feasibility and acceptability of MYLO. The initial outcomes suggest that MYLO has the potential to support the mental health of young people and help them resolve their own problems. We aim to establish whether the use of MYLO leads to a meaningful reduction in participants\' symptoms of depression and anxiety and whether these are maintained over time by conducting a randomized controlled evaluation trial.