A Comparison of ChatGPT and Human Questionnaire Evaluations of the Urological Cancer Videos Most Watched on YouTube

Abstract

AimTo examine the reliability of ChatGPT in evaluating the quality of medical content of the most watched videos related to urological cancers on YouTube. Material and methodsIn March 2024 a playlist was created of the first 20 videos watched on YouTube for each type of urological cancer. The video texts were evaluated by ChatGPT and by a urology specialist using the DISCERN-5 and Global Quality Scale (GQS) questionnaires. The results obtained were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. ResultsFor the prostate, bladder, renal, and testicular cancer videos, the median (IQR) DISCERN-5 scores given by the human evaluator and ChatGPT were (Human: 4 [1], 3 [0], 3 [2], 3 [1], P = .11; ChatGPT: 3 [1.75], 3 [1], 3 [2], 3 [0], P = .4, respectively) and the GQS scores were (Human: 4 [1.75], 3 [0.75], 3.5 [2], 3.5 [1], P = .12; ChatGPT: 4 [1], 3 [0.75], 3 [1], 3.5 [1], P = .1, respectively), with no significant difference determined between the scores. The repeatability of the ChatGPT responses was determined to be similar at 25 % for prostate cancer, 30 % for bladder cancer, 30 % for renal cancer, and 35 % for testicular cancer (P = .92). No statistically significant difference was determined between the median (IQR) DISCERN-5 and GQS scores given by humans and ChatGPT for the content of videos about prostate, bladder, renal, and testicular cancer (P > .05). ConclusionAlthough ChatGPT is successful in evaluating the medical quality of video texts, the results should be evaluated with caution as the repeatability of the results is low.