Patient AI Trust Dynamics Before and After Orthopedic Consultation (ORTHO-OP-GPT) (ORTHO-OP-GPT)

June 1, 2026 updated by: Utku Gürhan

Longitudinal Pre-Post Patient AI Trust Dynamics in Orthopedic Outpatients: A Mixed-Methods Observational Study With Matched Physician-Patient Dyads

Patients increasingly consult artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots such as ChatGPT for health information before clinical visits, yet the impact of an actual orthopedic consultation on patient trust in AI-derived information remains unknown. This prospective longitudinal observational study quantifies how a single orthopedic outpatient consultation modifies patient trust in AI chatbots, the concordance between AI-derived and physician-delivered information, and patient anxiety, using a paired pre-post survey design supplemented by a matched physician-side assessment. Adult patients (18 years and older) presenting to two orthopedic outpatient clinics in Cyprus complete a brief pre-consultation questionnaire (T0) capturing demographics, AI use patterns, prior AI consultation regarding the current complaint, baseline trust, expectations, and anxiety. Immediately after their consultation they complete a second questionnaire (T1) assessing concordance with physician advice, trust change, consultation facilitation, post-consultation anxiety, and future intention. The consulting physician completes a brief 30-second post-visit form capturing whether AI was discussed, the medical accuracy of AI-derived information conveyed by the patient, and the effect of the AI discussion on consultation duration. The primary outcomes are the paired within-patient change in AI trust between T0 and T1 and physician-patient concordance on AI versus physician advice. Target enrollment is 180 to obtain 150 paired completed assessments.

Study Overview

Status

Not yet recruiting

Conditions

Detailed Description

Background and Rationale: Cross-sectional surveys have documented increasing patient use of AI chatbots for health information seeking. However, no published study has assessed how an actual physician consultation modifies patient trust in AI in a paired pre/post design, nor has any study captured the physician perspective on the same encounter in a matched dyad. Routine clinical encounters may be the primary mechanism by which patients calibrate their trust in AI-derived medical information.

Setting and Population: Two university-affiliated orthopedic outpatient clinics in North Cyprus.

Procedures:

  • T0 (pre-consultation, waiting room, approximately 5 minutes): 14-item self-report questionnaire.
  • Consultation: usual care.
  • T1 (post-consultation, departure, approximately 5 minutes): 10-item self-report questionnaire.
  • Physician form (post-consultation, approximately 30 seconds): 5-item brief assessment.
  • Patient and physician forms are linked by an anonymous Participant ID.

Statistical Analysis Plan: Paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests for paired continuous outcomes; McNemar test or Stuart-Maxwell for paired categorical outcomes; Cohen's kappa for inter-rater agreement (AI versus physician); multinomial logistic regression for predictors of trust shift. All analyses two-sided, alpha equals 0.05. SPSS version 28.

Data Management: Anonymous CSV stored locally, encrypted, retained for 5 years per institutional policy. De-identified participant-level data available upon reasonable request after publication.

No formal pilot study is conducted. Instead, the first 20 participants will be prospectively monitored for protocol feasibility (mean completion time, drop-out rate, item-level missing data) as an embedded running pilot.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

180

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

  • Cyprus
      • Kyrenia, Cyprus
        • University of Kyrenia, Dr. Suat Gunsel Hospital - Orthopedic Outpatient Clinic
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Utku Gurhan, MD
      • Nicosia, Cyprus
        • Near East University Hospital - Orthopedic Outpatient Clinic

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Consecutive adult patients (18 years and older) presenting to the participating orthopedic outpatient clinics during the recruitment window who consent to participate. No specific orthopedic diagnosis is required.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age 18 years or older
  • Presenting to an orthopedic outpatient clinic for any consultation
  • Able to read and respond to a Turkish-language questionnaire
  • Provides informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Inability to complete a self-report questionnaire (e.g., severe cognitive impairment, language barrier)
  • Re-presentation within the same recruitment window (each patient is enrolled only once)
  • Refusal of consent for either T0 or T1

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Mean within-patient change in self-reported trust in artificial intelligence-derived health information, measured by a study-specific 5-point Likert item (T0.11) and a study-specific 3-level categorical change item (T1.4).
Time Frame: Baseline (within 15 minutes pre-consultation in the orthopaedic outpatient waiting room) and immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit, same-day index visit).
Trust in AI-derived health information is assessed pre-consultation by a study-specific single-item 5-point Likert scale (item T0.11: "How much do you trust the AI's answer?"; anchors 1 = not at all, 5 = completely), administered only to patients who reported pre-consultation AI use (item T0.9 = Yes). Post-consultation, trust change is reassessed by a study-specific 3-level categorical item (item T1.4: increased trust / unchanged / decreased trust). For paired analysis, the post-consultation score is derived by mapping T1.4 categories to integer shifts (+1 / 0 / -1, with floor 1 and ceiling 5) relative to T0.11. Unit of measure: Likert score points on a 1-5 scale (continuous derived score) and proportion of patients per 3-level category. Primary analysis: paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test on the derived continuous score; sensitivity analysis: McNemar test on the 3-level categorical change.
Baseline (within 15 minutes pre-consultation in the orthopaedic outpatient waiting room) and immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit, same-day index visit).
Patient-physician concordance on artificial intelligence-versus-physician medical advice agreement, measured by Cohen's kappa coefficient between a study-specific 4-category patient item (T1.2) and a study-specific 5-point physician-rated AI medical accu
Time Frame: Immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), for both patient (T1.2) and physician (H2) forms; same-day index visit.
Concordance is assessed by Cohen's kappa coefficient comparing patient-reported AI-physician concordance (item T1.2: fully concordant / partially concordant / discordant / physician did not address; dichotomized to concordant vs. non-concordant) and physician-reported AI medical accuracy (item H2: 5-point Likert anchored 1 = entirely incorrect to 5 = entirely correct; dichotomized at ≥ 3 as concordant). Unit of measure: kappa coefficient (range -1 to +1) with 95% confidence interval, and percentage of dyads classified as concordant on each instrument.
Immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), for both patient (T1.2) and physician (H2) forms; same-day index visit.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Mean within-patient change in self-reported anxiety, measured by an 11-point 0-to-10 visual analogue scale anchored 0 = no anxiety and 10 = worst possible anxiety (items T0.14 baseline, T1.5 post-consultation).
Time Frame: Baseline (within 15 minutes pre-consultation) and immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Anxiety is measured pre-consultation (item T0.14) and post-consultation (item T1.5) using the same 0-to-10 visual analogue scale. Within-patient change is calculated as T1.5 minus T0.14. Unit of measure: scale points (range -10 to +10). Analysis: paired t-test with Wilcoxon signed-rank as sensitivity analysis; Cohen's d effect size reported.
Baseline (within 15 minutes pre-consultation) and immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Percentage of enrolled patients reporting pre-consultation artificial intelligence use for the current orthopaedic complaint, measured by a study-specific single-item yes/no question (T0.9).
Time Frame: Baseline (within 15 minutes pre-consultation, same-day index visit).
Proportion of enrolled patients responding "Yes" to item T0.9 ("Before today's appointment, did you ask an AI chatbot a question about this health concern?"). Unit of measure: percentage of participants, reported with exact (Clopper-Pearson) 95% confidence interval.
Baseline (within 15 minutes pre-consultation, same-day index visit).
Percentage of pre-consultation artificial-intelligence users whose physician independently confirmed that AI was raised during the consultation, measured by a study-specific yes/no physician item (H1).
Time Frame: Baseline (T0.9, pre-consultation) and immediately after the consultation (H1, within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Among patients responding "Yes" to T0.9, the proportion in whom the treating physician independently reported "Yes" to item H1 ("Did the patient raise AI during this consultation?"). Unit of measure: percentage of patients with exact 95% confidence interval.
Baseline (T0.9, pre-consultation) and immediately after the consultation (H1, within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Percentage of consultations in which the physician reported that the artificial-intelligence discussion shortened, did not change, or prolonged the encounter, measured by a study-specific 3-category physician item (H3).
Time Frame: Immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Among consultations in which the patient raised AI (H1 = Yes), the physician's categorical rating of effect on consultation duration (H3: "shortened" / "no change" / "prolonged"). Unit of measure: percentage of consultations per category (descriptive).
Immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Mean patient rating of how prior artificial-intelligence use facilitated the consultation, measured by a study-specific 5-point Likert item (T1.4b: 1 = much more difficult, 5 = much easier).
Time Frame: Immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Among patients with T0.9 = Yes, patient-reported facilitation by prior AI use (item T1.4b). Unit of measure: Likert score points (mean with standard deviation), and percentage of participants endorsing scores ≥ 4.
Immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Mean patient-reported future intention to use and to recommend artificial intelligence for health information, measured by two study-specific 5-point Likert items (T1.7 future use; T1.8 recommendation to a friend).
Time Frame: Immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.
Future-use intention (item T1.7: 1 = definitely will not, 5 = definitely will) and recommendation intention (item T1.8: 1 = definitely will not, 5 = definitely will). Unit of measure: Likert score points (mean with standard deviation), and percentage of participants endorsing scores ≥ 4 on each item.
Immediately after the consultation (within 15 minutes of consultation exit), same-day index visit.

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Exploratory association between categorical post-consultation trust change and demographic predictors, estimated by multinomial logistic regression with the study-specific 3-level trust change item (T1.4) as the outcome and age band, sex, education level
Time Frame: Through study completion, an average of 12 months from first enrolment.
Multinomial logistic regression model: outcome = T1.4 (decreased / unchanged / increased trust, reference category = unchanged); predictors = age band (5-level), sex (3-level), education (5-level), employment status, weekly internet-use frequency. Unit of measure: adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.
Through study completion, an average of 12 months from first enrolment.
Internal consistency of a four-item artificial-intelligence trust subscale, measured by Cronbach's alpha across items T0.11 (baseline trust), T1.4 (post-consultation trust change, linearly recoded), T1.7 (future-use intention), and T1.8 (recommendation
Time Frame: Through study completion, an average of 12 months from first enrolment.
Cronbach's alpha is estimated on the final analytic sample using the four trust-related Likert items listed. Unit of measure: alpha coefficient (range 0 to 1) with bootstrap 95% confidence interval.
Through study completion, an average of 12 months from first enrolment.

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Utku Gürhan

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Utku Gurhan, MD, University of Kyrenia

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

June 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

November 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

January 1, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 18, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 1, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

June 8, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 8, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 1, 2026

Last Verified

June 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

  • ORTHO-OP-GPT-2026

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Health Literacy

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Australia

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Subscribe