Barw Medical Journal
Submit your article

Original Articles Barw Medical Journal. 2024

Comparing ChatGPT and Google Bard: Assessing AI-Powered Information Retrieval in Nursing

, , , ,

Yousif M. Mahmood

  • 1Smart Health Tower, Madam Mitterrand Street, Sulaymaniyah, Kurdistan, Iraq

Corresponding author

22 articles in this journal

Rebaz O. Mohammed

  • 1Smart Health Tower, Madam Mitterrand Street, Sulaymaniyah, Kurdistan, Iraq

8 articles in this journal

Imad J. Habibullah

  • 2Bakhshin Medical Community Halabja, Halabja, Sulaymaniyah, Kurdistan, Iraq

7 articles in this journal

Hawbash M. Rahim

  • 3Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Health Sciences, University of Human Development, Kurdistan Region, Sulaymaniyah, Iraq

17 articles in this journal

Abdulwahid M. Salih

  • 4College of Medicine, University of Sulaimani, Madam Mitterrand Street, Sulaymaniyah, Kurdistan, Iraq

44 articles in this journal

  • 1Smart Health Tower, Madam Mitterrand Street, Sulaymaniyah, Kurdistan, Iraq
  • 2Bakhshin Medical Community Halabja, Halabja, Sulaymaniyah, Kurdistan, Iraq
  • 3Department of Medical Laboratory Science, College of Health Sciences, University of Human Development, Kurdistan Region, Sulaymaniyah, Iraq
  • 4College of Medicine, University of Sulaimani, Madam Mitterrand Street, Sulaymaniyah, Kurdistan, Iraq

Corresponding author: [email protected] (Yousif M. Mahmood)

Submitted
5 Jan 2024
Accepted
18 Mar 2024
Published
6 Feb 2024
Reads
1,686
Downloads
1,371
Citations
9 Citations are Crossref’s count on 8 November 2026.

doi:10.58742/hsn32c73 Open access CC BY 4.0 licence (opens in a new tab)

Download PDF XML

Abstract

IntroductionIn healthcare, rapid access to accurate information is essential, especially for nurses who make critical decisions. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers promise in this context, with ChatGPT and Google Bard being notable AI-driven information retrieval tools.

MethodsThis study evaluated ChatGPT and Google Bard's performance by assessing their responses to 50 diverse medical knowledge questions, covering infection control, vital signs, CPR, and more, and comparing their response to the correct answers.

ResultsChatGPT achieved a 64% accuracy rate, while Google Bard achieved 56%. Both models agreed on key medical concepts, but disagreements emerged in some areas, highlighting disparities in their responses. Nurses' expertise in patient-centered care, clinical judgment, and communication complements AI. AI aids in providing evidence-based information but cannot replace nurses' human touch and critical thinking. Integrating AI into nursing education enhances learning and prepares professionals for evolving healthcare landscapes.

ConclusionChatGPT and Google Bard have strengths and weaknesses, making them valuable aids but not substitutes for nurses. Ethical considerations are vital as AI continues to shape healthcare. Nurses must ensure ethical AI use while upholding their commitment to compassionate care.

Keywords Healthcare Nurse Artificial Intelligence ChatGPT Google Bard Medical Knowledge All subjects

Sections3

The full text is in the PDF of record

This article was published as a typeset PDF and XML. The abstract above is the version of record’s own summary; the complete text, its figures, its tables and its reference list are in the files below.

Read the PDF XML
Citable now
Barw Medical Journal. 2024
Where it sits

References27

  1. McFarland A, MacDonald E: Role of the nurse in identifying and addressing health inequalities. Nurs Stand. 2019, 34:37–42. 10.7748/ns.2019.e11341 doi:10.7748/ns.2019.e11341

    10.7748/ns.2019.e11341CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  2. Yoo JY, Kim JH, Kim JS, Kim HL, Ki JS: Clinical nurses’ beliefs, knowledge, organizational readiness and level of implementation of evidence-based practice: The first step to creating an evidence-based practice culture. PLoS One. 2019, 14:e0226742. 10.1371/journal.pone.0226742. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0226742

    10.1371/journal.pone.0226742CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  3. Nibbelink CW, Brewer BB: Decision-making in nursing practice: An integrative literature review. J Clin Nurs. 2018, 27:917–28. 10.1111/jocn.14151. doi:10.1111/jocn.14151

    10.1111/jocn.14151CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  4. McGrow K: Artificial intelligence: Essentials for nursing. Nursing (Lond). 2019, 49:46–9. 10.1097/01.NURSE.0000577716.57052.8d. doi:10.1097/01.NURSE.0000577716.57052.8d

    10.1097/01.NURSE.0000577716.57052.8dCrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  5. Robert N: How artificial intelligence is changing nursing. Nurs Manage. 2019, 50:30–9. 10.1097/01.NUMA.0000578988.56622.21. doi: 10.1097/01.NUMA.0000578988.56622.21

    10.1097/01.NUMA.0000578988.56622.21CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  6. Sallam M: ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns. Healthc (Basel, Switzerland). 2023, 11:. 10.3390/healthcare11060887. doi:10.3390/healthcare11060887

    10.3390/healthcare11060887CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  7. Dave T, Athaluri SA, Singh S: ChatGPT in medicine: an overview of its applications, advantages, limitations, future prospects, and ethical considerations. Front. Artif. Intell. 2023, 6:. doi:10.3389%2Ffrai.2023.1169595.

    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

  8. Irwin P, Jones D, Fealy S: What is ChatGPT and what do we do with it? Implications of the age of AI for nursing and midwifery practice and education: An editorial. Nurse Educ. Today. 2023, 127:105835. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105835

    10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105835CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  9. Hirosawa T, Mizuta K, Harada Y, Shimizu T: Comparative Evaluation of Diagnostic Accuracy Between Google Bard and Physicians. Am J Med. Published Online First: August 2023. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2023.08.003

    10.1016/j.amjmed.2023.08.003CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  10. Salih AM, Mohammed BA, Hasan KM, Fattah FH, Najmadden ZB, Kakamad FH, Ahmed SM, Kareem HO, Mohammed SH, Abdalla BA. Mitigating the Burden of meningitis outbreak; ChatGPT and Google Bard Recommendations for the general populations; general practitioners and pediatricians. Barw Medical Journal. 2023 May 31. doi:10.58742/bmj.v1i2.32

    10.58742/bmj.v1i2.32CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  11. Salih AM, Mohammed NA, Mahmood YM, Hassan SJ, Namiq HS, Ghafour AK, Asaad SK, Kakamad SH, Abdullah F, HamaSalih HM, Karim M. ChatGPT Insight and Opinion Regarding the Controversies in Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome. Barw Medical Journal. 2023 Sep 18. doi:10.58742/bmj.v1i2.48

    10.58742/bmj.v1i2.48CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  12. Muhialdeen AS, Ahmed JO, Baba HO, Abdullah IY, Hassan HA, Najar KA, Mikael TM, Mustafa MQ, Mohammed DA, Omer DA, Bapir R. Kscien’s List; A New Strategy to Discourage Predatory Journals and Publishers (Second Version). Barw Medical Journal. 2023 Mar 1. doi:10.58742/bmj.v1i1.14

    10.58742/bmj.v1i1.14CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  13. Scerri A, Morin KH: Using chatbots like ChatGPT to support nursing practice. J Clin Nurs. 2023, 32:4211–3. doi:10.1111/jocn.16677

    10.1111/jocn.16677CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  14. Miao H, Ahn H: Impact of ChatGPT on Interdisciplinary Nursing Education and Research. Asian/Pacific Isl. Nurs. J. 2023, 7:e48136. 10.2196/48136. doi:10.2196/48136

    10.2196/48136CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  15. Javaid M, Haleem A, Singh RP: ChatGPT for healthcare services: An emerging stage for an innovative perspective. BenchCouncil Trans Benchmarks, Stand Eval. 2023, 3:100105. doi:10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100105

    10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100105CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  16. Banks J: The Human Touch: Practical and Ethical Implications of Putting AI and Robotics to Work for Patients. IEEE Pulse. 2018, 9:15–8. doi:10.1109/MPUL.2018.2814238

    10.1109/MPUL.2018.2814238CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  17. Pepito JAT, Babate FJG, Dator WLT: The nurses’ touch: An irreplaceable component of caring. Nurs open. 2023, 10:5838–42. doi:10.1002/nop2.1860

    10.1002/nop2.1860CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  18. Morrow E, Zidaru T, Ross F, Mason C, Patel KD, Ream M, Stockley R: Artificial intelligence technologies and compassion in healthcare: A systematic scoping review. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13:971044. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.971044

    10.3389/fpsyg.2022.971044CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  19. Ronquillo CE, Peltonen L-M, Pruinelli L, et al.: Artificial intelligence in nursing: Priorities and opportunities from an international invitational think-tank of the Nursing and Artificial Intelligence Leadership Collaborative. J Adv Nurs. 2021, doi:77:3707–17. 10.1111/jan.14855

    10.1111/jan.14855CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  20. Patil NS, Huang RS, van der Pol CB, Larocque N: Comparative Performance of ChatGPT and Bard in a Text-Based Radiology Knowledge Assessment. Can Assoc Radiol J = J l’Association Can des Radiol. 2023, 8465371231193716. doi:10.1177/08465371231193716

    10.1177/08465371231193716CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  21. Taira K, Itaya T, Hanada A: Performance of the Large Language Model ChatGPT on the National Nurse Examinations in Japan: Evaluation Study. JMIR Nurs. 2023, 6:e47305. doi:10.2196/47305

    10.2196/47305CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  22. De Gagne JC: The State of Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Education: Past, Present, and Future Directions. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2023, 20:. doi:10.3390/ijerph20064884

    10.3390/ijerph20064884CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  23. Buchanan C, Howitt ML, Wilson R, Booth RG, Risling T, Bamford M: Predicted Influences of Artificial Intelligence on Nursing Education: Scoping Review. JMIR Nurs. 2021, 4:e23933. doi:10.2196/23933

    10.2196/23933CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  24. Seibert K, Domhoff D, Bruch D, Schulte-Althoff M, Fürstenau D, Biessmann F, Wolf-Ostermann K: Application Scenarios for Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Care: Rapid Review. J Med Internet Res. 2021, 23:e26522. doi:10.2196/26522

    10.2196/26522CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  25. Sauerbrei A, Kerasidou A, Lucivero F, Hallowell N: The impact of artificial intelligence on the person-centred, doctor-patient relationship: some problems and solutions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023, 23:73. doi:10.1186/s12911-023-02162-y

    10.1186/s12911-023-02162-yCrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  26. Farhud DD, Zokaei S: Ethical Issues of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Healthcare. Iran. J. Public Health. 2021, 50:i–v. doi:10.18502/ijph.v50i11.7600

    10.18502/ijph.v50i11.7600CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

  27. Naik N, Hameed BMZ, Shetty DK, et al.: Legal and Ethical Consideration in Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Who Takes Responsibility? . Front. Surg. 2022, 9:. doi:10.3389/fsurg.2022.862322

    10.3389/fsurg.2022.862322CrossrefPubMedScopusGoogle Scholar

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s)

  • Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Comparative Study of ChatGPT and Google Bard in Clinical Diagnostics

    Aso S. Muhialdeen, Shorsh A. Mohammed, Nahida Hama Ameen Ahmed, Shaho F. Ahmed, Wriya N. Hassan, Hoshmand R. Asaad, Dana T. Gharib, Huda M. Muhammad and 13 more

    Introduction The introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT and Google Bard promises transformative advances in clinical diagnostics. The aim of this study is to examine the ability of these two AI tools to diagnose various medical scenarios. Methods Experts from varied medical domains curated 20…

    2023 1,062 reads 5 citations

    doi:10.58742/pry94q89

    Full text PDF XML

  • Assessment of Chat-GPT, Gemini, and Perplexity in Principle of Research Publication: A Comparative Study

    Ameer M. Salih, Jaafar Omer Ahmed, Dilan S. Hiwa, Abdulwahid M. Salih, Rawezh Q. Salih, Hemn A. Hassan, Yousif M. Mahmood, Shvan H. Mohammed and 1 more

    Introduction Many researchers utilize artificial intelligence (AI) to aid their research endeavors. This study seeks to assess and contrast the performance of three sophisticated AI systems, namely, ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity when applied to an examination focused on knowledge regarding research publication…

    2024 4,902 reads 1 citation

    doi:10.58742/bmj.v2i4.140

    Full text PDF XML

  • Role of ChatGPT and Gemini in the Urology Field: A Case-Based Study

    Rawa Bapir, Ahmed Mohammed Abdalqadir, Kamran Hassan Bhatti, Nadeem Sohail, Bryar Othman Muhammed, Ameer M. Salih, Hunzalah Hassan Bhatti, Hawbash Rahim and 7 more

    Introduction The healthcare sector is witnessing a transformation with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI), exemplified by ChatGPT and Gemini AI. These AI systems emulate human conversation and provide accurate medical responses. This study explores their integration into medical decision-making in the urology…

    2024 1,404 reads 0 citations

    doi:10.58742/bmj.v2i3.116

    Full text PDF XML

PDF