Abstract
Data about the quality of cancer information that chatbots and other artificial intelligence systems provide are limited. Here, we evaluate the accuracy of cancer information on ChatGPT compared with the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI’s) answers by using the questions on the “Common Cancer Myths and Misconceptions” web page. The NCI’s answers and ChatGPT answers to each question were blinded, and then evaluated for accuracy (accurate: yes vs no). Ratings were evaluated independently for each question, and then compared between the blinded NCI and ChatGPT answers. Additionally, word count and Flesch-Kincaid readability grade level for each individual response were evaluated. Following expert review, the percentage of overall agreement for accuracy was 100% for NCI answers and 96.9% for ChatGPT outputs for questions 1 through 13 (ĸ = ‒0.03, standard error = 0.08). There were few noticeable differences in the number of words or the readability of the answers from NCI or ChatGPT. Overall, the results suggest that ChatGPT provides accurate information about common cancer myths and misconceptions.
Patients are increasingly turning to the internet for information about cancer, with 80% of US adults reportedly using the internet to seek health information (1). Within the online communication environment, cancer misinformation and harmful information remain a serious concern (2). Chatbots and other artificial intelligence (AI) systems have become increasingly popular in recent years for providing information and assistance to users in online spaces (3); recently, 1 such AI system receiving a lot of public and news attention is ChatGPT, which uses natural language processing to generate responses to user input. Given the importance of accurate information in the field of cancer research and treatment, determining the accuracy of AI (mis)information outputs from chat platforms such as ChatGPT is critical to clinicians and, more broadly, health and medical communicators. As an initial step in monitoring these public platforms, we engaged in a small-scale study of the information ChatGPT generated.
Using the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI’s) web page “Common Cancer Myths and Misconceptions” (4), on December 20, 2022, we asked ChatGPT (December 15, 2022, version) 13 questions about cancer that are common points of confusion among the public (per NCI). The NCI’s answers and ChatGPT answers to each question were blinded, and then evaluated for accuracy based on the established knowledge of 5 scientific reviewers with expertise in cancer treatment and cancer misinformation (B.K., C.B., A.K., E.W., and S.A.) between December 20, 2022, and January 3, 2023. Expert reviewers were not compensated. Accuracy ratings (yes vs no) were evaluated independently for each question, and then compared between the blinded NCI and ChatGPT answers. Interrater agreement was evaluated by Fleiss ĸ (5). Statistical analyses were performed using Stata, version 17 (StataCorp LP).
Following expert review, 13 of 13 NCI answers were rated as accurate by 5 of 5 expert reviewers, demonstrating 100% interrater agreement. ChatGPT outputs were determined to be accurate by 5 of 5 reviewers for 11 of 13 questions, demonstrating 96.9% overall agreement. The remaining 2 questions (question 5, “Does my attitude—positive or negative—determine my risk of getting or surviving cancer?” and question 9, “Do power lines cause cancer?”) were rated as accurate by 4 of 5 reviewers, with a single unique reviewer rating each question as inaccurate (ĸ = ‒0.03, SE = 0.08, P = .6). Table 1 displays all questions and associated answers from NCI and ChatGPT, respectively, as well as word count and Flesch-Kincaid readability grade level for each individual response. There were few noticeable differences in the number of words or the readability of the answers from NCI or ChatGPT. Answers from both sources were written at a less readable rate than would likely be recommended by health literacy advocates, for example. Although our team did not code for specific message features, multiple observers noted their perception that the ChatGPT messages often used terms associated with hedging and uncertainty that could lead to the adoption of a belief or practice that could be harmful. Overall, the results suggest that output from ChatGPT provides accurate information about common cancer myths and misconceptions without providing misinformation or harmful information to users. To evaluate whether repeated questioning could result in outputs with semantic variations that could lead to misinformation, we completed 5 runs repeatedly from the same input for each of the 13 questions (Supplementary Table 1, available online). On review, although subtle sentence structure changes were noted, the answers remained consistent, suggesting that answers remain accurate with repetitive questioning.
Table 1.
Question | NCI answer | NCI WC | NCI FKG | ChatGPT answer | C WC | C FKG |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Is cancer a death sentence? |
|
133 | 15.8 | Cancer is not necessarily a death sentence. The prognosis for people with cancer depends on many factors, including the type and stage of the cancer, the person’s overall health, and the effectiveness of treatment. Some types of cancer can be cured, while others may be managed through treatments such as surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, or targeted therapies. In some cases, people with cancer may live many years with the disease, while in other cases, cancer may be more aggressive and may progress quickly. It is important to work with a healthcare team to determine the best treatment plan based on the specifics of your situation. | 104 | 11.4 |
Will eating sugar make my cancer worse? | No. Although research has shown that cancer cells consume more sugar (glucose) than normal cells, no studies have shown that eating sugar will make your cancer worse or that, if you stop eating sugar, your cancer will shrink or disappear. However, a high-sugar diet may contribute to excess weight gain, and obesity is associated with an increased risk of developing several types of cancer. For more information, see the NCI fact sheet on Obesity and Cancer. | 76 | 12.7 |
|
234 | 13.7 |
Do artificial sweeteners cause cancer? | No. Researchers have conducted studies on the safety of the artificial sweeteners (sugar substitutes) saccharin (Sweet 'N Low®, Sweet Twin®, NectaSweet®); cyclamate; aspartame (Equal®, NutraSweet®); acesulfame potassium (Sunett®, Sweet One®); sucralose (Splenda®); and neotame and found no evidence that they cause cancer in humans. All of these artificial sweeteners except for cyclamate have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for sale in the United States. For more information, see the NCI fact sheet on Artificial Sweeteners and Cancer. | 80 | 9.5 |
|
157 | 14.9 |
Is cancer contagious? |
|
174 | 13.9 | Cancer is not a contagious disease, meaning it cannot be transmitted from person to person like a cold or the flu. Cancer is a disease in which abnormal cells divide and grow uncontrollably, forming tumors. There are many different types of cancer, and each type can have a different cause. Some types of cancer are caused by genetic factors, while others may be caused by exposure to certain substances, such as tobacco smoke or radiation. Some types of cancer may also be caused by infections, such as the human papillomavirus (HPV), which can cause certain types of cancer, including cervical cancer and some types of head and neck cancer. However, these infections are not transmitted through casual contact and are not contagious in the same way that infectious diseases are. | 130 | 11.2 |
Does my attitude—positive or negative—determine my risk of getting or surviving cancer? | To date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that links a person’s “attitude” to their risk of developing or dying from cancer. If you have cancer, it’s normal to feel sad, angry, or discouraged sometimes and positive or upbeat at other times. People with a positive attitude may be more likely to maintain social connections and stay active, and physical activity and emotional support may help you cope with your cancer. For more information, see the NCI fact sheet on Stress and Cancer. | 83 | 11.2 |
|
167 | 20.2 |
Can cancer surgery or a tumor biopsy cause cancer to spread in the body? | The chance that surgery will cause cancer to spread to other parts of the body is extremely low. Following standard procedures, surgeons use special methods and take many steps to prevent cancer cells from spreading during biopsies or surgery to remove tumors. For example, if they must remove tissue from more than one area of the body, they use different surgical tools for each area. For information about how cancer spreads in the body, see our page on Metastatic Cancer. | 80 | 11.0 |
|
215 | 13.4 |
Will cancer get worse if exposed to air? | No. Exposure to air will not make tumors grow faster or cause cancer to spread to other parts of the body. For information about how cancer spreads in the body, see our page on Metastatic Cancer. | 36 | 8.8 |
|
198 | 12.8 |
Do cell phones cause cancer? | No, not according to the best studies completed so far. Cancer is caused by genetic mutations, and cell phones emit a type of low-frequency energy that does not damage genes. For more information, see the NCI fact sheet on Cell Phones and Cancer Risk. | 44 | 7.5 |
|
196 | 15.3 |
Do power lines cause cancer? | No, not according to the best studies completed so far. Power lines emit both electric and magnetic energy. The electric energy emitted by power lines is easily shielded or weakened by walls and other objects. The magnetic energy emitted by power lines is a low-frequency form of radiation that does not damage genes. For more information, see the NCI fact sheet on Electromagnetic Fields and Cancer. | 66 | 13.2 |
|
180 | 13.7 |
Are there herbal products that can cure cancer? | No. Although some studies suggest that alternative or complementary therapies, including some herbs, may help patients cope with the side effects of cancer treatment, no herbal products have been shown to be effective for treating cancer. In fact, some herbal products may be harmful when taken during chemotherapy or radiation therapy because they may interfere with how these treatments work. Cancer patients should talk with their doctor about any complementary and alternative medicine products—including vitamins and herbal supplements—they may be using. For more information, see Complementary and Alternative Medicine. | 91 | 15.0 |
|
154 | 15.5 |
If someone in my family has cancer, am I likely to get cancer, too? |
|
128 | 13.5 |
|
164 | 17.4 |
If no one in my family has had cancer, does that mean I’m risk-free? | No. Based on the most recent data, about 38% of men and women will be diagnosed with cancer at some point during their lives. Most cancers are caused by genetic changes that occur throughout a person’s lifetime as a natural result of aging and exposure to environmental factors, such as tobacco smoke and radiation. Other factors, such as what kind of food you eat, how much you eat, and whether you exercise, may also influence your risk of developing cancer. For more information, see Cancer Causes and Risk Factors. | 90 | 11.8 |
|
157 | 18.7 |
Do antiperspirants or deodorants cause breast cancer? | No. The best studies so far have found no evidence linking the chemicals typically found in antiperspirants and deodorants with changes in breast tissue. For more information, see the NCI fact sheet on Antiperspirants/Deodorants and Breast Cancer. | 38 | 12.6 |
|
188 | 21.8 |
FKG = Flesch-Kincaid grade; NCI = National Cancer Institute; WC = word count.
This brief report offers important insights into the potentially positive capabilities of ChatGPT and other AI systems in the context of cancer-related (mis)information. As a team, we were initially uncertain about the utility of ChatGPT for health information and thought that the AI system could unintentionally convey misinformation or harmful information to users. This possibility is still important to consider for any AI chat system, given that users can problematically shape chatbot responses in a short period (6); researchers have found that AI systems can “enact malignant stereotypes” (7); and, specific to ChatGPT, there is reasonable skepticism about the tool’s utility (8) when considering a breadth of topics beyond the basic cancer information we asked about in our study. ChatGPT could be the future of AI chat technology (or perhaps the tool is just a popular example of the state of the technology’s capabilities); regardless of this particular tool’s features, however, we must consider how best to monitor and evaluate the use of these tools in the online communication environment. Future systematic work to evaluate use and outputs of such platforms requires an infrastructure to monitor these sites, their algorithms and information sources, and potential bias in providing information equitably to diverse populations. There is concern that algorithms reinforce current health disparities and inequities (9), although the extent to which this is true about health information specifically is currently unknown. Other practical considerations about how people will interpret AI-generated chat responses in terms of trust and credibility (10) exist, particularly as they relate to medical and health information, behaviors, and services compared with consumer products, behaviors, and services.
The limitations of this study are that we evaluated only common cancer misinformation in the English language. More obscure cancer myths may have incomplete or English-only information, resulting in the model’s inability to be trained on a sufficiently large and diverse data set to answer fewer common questions or non–English-language questions accurately. Finally, although this study obtained contemporary ChatGPT outputs, there is a possibility that these outputs were trained on models that could be scientifically outdated. Currently, ChatGPT is limited to data collected before 2021, so it is possible that as new scientific information emerges, ChatGPT may not be an accurate source of information or, at the least, its accuracy will be delayed.
Collectively, we found ChatGPT outputs in response to common cancer misinformation to be accurate and similar to answers that the NCI provided. In the context of these questions, there does not appear to be a clear area where this system may be susceptible to misinformation. Future research is needed to determine whether other chatbots and AI-driven systems provide accurate cancer information consistently, whether these findings apply to more diverse claims about cancer across the continuum, and what the ideal infrastructure might be for future monitoring to ensure accuracy of cancer information within the online information ecosystem.
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgements
The funders did not participate in the design of the study, the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; the writing of the manuscript; nor the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Contributor Information
Skyler B Johnson, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Andy J King, Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Echo L Warner, Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; College of Nursing, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Sanjay Aneja, Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Benjamin H Kann, Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Carma L Bylund, Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Data availability
The data underlying this article are available online, and the data sets were derived from sources in the public domain: https://chat.openai.com and https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/myths.
Funding
This study was funded, in part, by the Huntsman Cancer Institute.
Conflicts of interest
All authors had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Skyler B. Johnson, MD, has no financial conflicts of interest. All other researchers reported no financial conflicts of interests.
Author contributions
Skyler B Johnson, MD (Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Funding acquisition; Investigation; Methodology; Supervision; Validation; Writing—original draft; Writing—review & editing); Andy J. King, PhD (Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Methodology; Writing—review & editing); Echo L. Warner, PhD (Formal analysis; Writing—review & editing); Sanjay Aneja, MD (Formal analysis; Writing—review & editing); Benjamin H. Kann, MD (Formal analysis; Methodology; Writing—review & editing); Carma L. Bylund, PhD (Conceptualization; Formal analysis; Methodology; Supervision; Writing—review & editing).
References
- 1. Calixte R, Rivera A, Oridota O, Beauchamp W, Camacho-Rivera M.. Social and demographic patterns of health-related Internet use among adults in the United States: a secondary data analysis of the Health Information National Trends Survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(18):6856. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Johnson SB, Parsons M, Dorff T, et al. Cancer misinformation and harmful information on Facebook and other social media: a brief report. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2022;114(7):1036–1039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Miner AS, Laranjo L, Kocaballi AB.. Chatbots in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3:65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Common cancer myths and misconceptions. National Cancer Institute. Updated December 6, 2022. Accessed December 16, 2022. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/myths
- 5. Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bulletin. 1971;76(5):378-382. [Google Scholar]
- 6. Vincent J. Twitter taught Microsoft’s AI chatbot to be a racist asshole in less than a day. The Verge. Updated March 24, 2016. Accessed December 21, 2022. https://www.theverge.com/2016/3/24/11297050/tay-microsoft-chatbot-racist
- 7. Hundt A, Agnew W, Zeng V, Kacianka S, Gombolay M. Robots enact malignant stereotypes. FACCT’22: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 2022;743-756.
- 8. Pearl M. The ChatGPT chatbot from OpenAI is amazing, creative, and totally wrong. Mashable. December 3, 2022. Accessed December 21, 2022. https://mashable.com/article/chatgpt-amazing-wrong
- 9. Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C, Mullainathan S.. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science. 2019;366(6464):447-453. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Bertinussen Nordheim C, Følstad A, Bjørkli CA.. An initial model of trust in chatbots for customer service—findings from a questionnaire study. Interact Comput. 2019;31:317-335. [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
The data underlying this article are available online, and the data sets were derived from sources in the public domain: https://chat.openai.com and https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/myths.