Is there something about the premise of the study or its method that you feel are not good?
After reading the article, what you wrote doesn't seem to make much sense.
After reading the article, what you wrote doesn't seem to make much sense.
N.B. as well: If someone thinks they have bleach in their _eye_ and can still open their eyes enough to write a Reddit post, much less read through ChatGPT’s extremely long answer, they’re almost certainly fine.
It costs you zero dollar to not post an irrelavant comment then. I really wonder how you justify this "I didn't read the article, but I have a very, very strong opinion (straight up calling it a made-up) on it" behavior. The internet is rotting people's brains I guess.
This is relevant to the real world of primary care only if your sole access to a medical professional is Reddit...
Yes. Down in the limitations section of the study (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar...):
> evaluators did not assess the chatbot responses for accuracy or fabricated information
That is a... significant issue with the methodology of the study.