Abstract
Background Despite the importance of informed consent in healthcare, the readability and specificity of consent forms often impedes patients’ comprehension. Health literacy is linked to patient outcomes, making it essential to address these issues. This study investigates the use of GPT-4 to simplify surgical consent forms and introduces an AI-human expert collaborative approach to validate content appropriateness.
Methods Consent forms from multiple institutions were assessed for readability and simplified using GPT-4, with pre- and post-simplification readability metrics compared using nonparametric tests. Independent reviews by medical authors and a malpractice defense attorney were conducted. Finally, GPT-4’s potential for generating de novo procedure-specific consent forms was assessed, with forms evaluated using a validated 8-item rubric and expert subspecialty surgeon review.
Results Analysis of 15 academic medical centers’ consent forms revealed significant reductions in average reading time, word rarity, and passive sentence frequency (all P<0.05) following GPT-4-faciliated simplification. Readability improved from an average college freshman to an 8th-grade level (P=0.004), matching the average American’s reading level. Medical and legal sufficiency consistency was confirmed. GPT-4 generated procedure-specific consent forms for five varied surgical procedures at an average 6th-grade reading level. These forms received perfect scores on a standardized consent form rubric and withstood scrutiny upon expert subspeciality surgeon review.
Conclusions This study demonstrates the first AI-human expert collaboration to enhance surgical consent forms, significantly improving readability without sacrificing clinical detail. Our framework could be extended to other patient communication materials, emphasizing clear communication and mitigating disparities related to health literacy barriers. Ensuring AI technologies are safely incorporated into clinical practice is crucial to reach a wide range of patients, including the most vulnerable.
Data Availability Statement The raw data was not publicly deposited due to incorporating proprietary datasets, such as the Corpus of Contemporary American English. However, data are available on request for replicability.
Code Availability Statement The code used for these analyses are available from the authors on request.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
