Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies could potentially change many aspects of clinical practice. While Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) can change the course of allergic diseases providing relief of symptoms that extend for many years after treatment completion, it can also bring uncertainty to patients, who turn to readily available resources such as ChatGPT-4 to address these doubts. The aim of this study was to use validated tools to evaluate the information provided by ChatGPT-4 regarding AIT in terms of quality, reliability and readability. Methods: In accordance with AIT clinical guidelines, 24 questions were selected and introduced in ChatGPT-4. Answers were evaluated by a panel of allergists, using validated tools DISCERN, JAMA Benchmark and Flesch Reading Ease Score and Grade Level. Results: Questions were sorted into 6 categories. ChatGPT provided bad quality information according to DISCERN medians scores in the “Definition”, “Standardization and Efficacy”, and “Safety and Adverse Reactions” categories. It provided insufficient information according to JAMA Benchmark across all categories. Finally, ChatGPT-4 answers required a “college graduate” level of education to be understood as they were very difficult to read. Conclusions: ChatGPT-4 exhibits potential as a valuable complement to healthcare; however, it requires further refinement. The information it provides should be approached with caution regarding its quality, as significant details may be omitted or may not be fully comprehensible. Artificial intelligence models continue to evolve, and medical professionals should participate in this process, given that AI impacts various aspects of life, including health, to ensure the availability of optimal information.

Background: Information/communication technologies such as mobile phone applications (apps) would enable chronic urticaria (CU) patients to self-evaluate their disease activity and control. Yet, recently Antó et al (2021) reported a global paucity of such apps for patients with CU. In this analysis, we assessed patient interest in using apps to monitor CU disease activity and control using questions from the CURICT study, Methods: The methodology for CURICT has been reported. Briefly, a 23-item questionnaire was completed by 1,841 CU patients from 17 UCAREs across 17 countries. Here, we analyzed patient responses to the CURICT questions on the use of apps for urticaria-related purposes. Results: As previously published, the majority of respondents had chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU; 63%; 18% chronic inducible urticaria [CIndu]; 19% with both), were female (70%) and in urban areas (75%). Over half of patients were very/extremely interested in an app to monitor disease activity (51%) and control (53%), while only ~1/10 were not. Patients with both urticaria types vs those with CSU only (OR, 1.36 [1.03-1.79]) and females vs males (OR[95%CI], 1.47 [1.17-1.85]) were more likely to be very to extremely interested in an app to assess disease control. Conclusions: Overall, patients with CU were highly interested in using an app to assess their disease activity and control. Development of well-designed apps, specific to disease types (CSU, CIndU, CSU+CIndU, etc), validated by experts across platforms would help improve the management and possibly outcomes of CU treatment while providing important patient information to be used in future research.

Food allergy: What are people looking for? An infodemiology studyAuthors :Karla Robles-Velasco, MD 1,2, Matias Panchana-Lascano, MD 2,3, Flavio Veintemilla Burgos, MD 2,3, Romina Hinostroza, MD 1,2, Jonathan A Bernstein, MD 4, Ivan Cherrez-Ojeda, MD, MSc 1,2Affiliations :1 Universidad Espiritu Santo, Samborondon 0901952, Ecuador2 Respiralab Research Group, Guayaquil 090507, Ecuador3 Universidad Catolica Santiago de Guayaquil 09014671, Ecuador4 University of Cincinnati Physicians Immunology Research Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA.

Background: Information and communication technologies (ICTs) improve patient-centered care and are routinely used in Allergic Rhinitis (AR), but patients’ preferences and attitudes are unexplored. This study examines AR-related information preferences and ICT use by AR patients. Methods: A survey-based cross-sectional study was carried out in Ecuador in seven centers of reference of allergic disease. Participants were 18 or older, diagnosed with AR, and had access to ICT and the internet. Descriptive and binomial logistic regression were done. A value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: 217 patients were included. 47% used ICTs to learn about AR, 38.2% found it useful. 75% disagreed that ICTs reduce doctor’s appointments. Individuals with poorer quality of life were 27% more likely to utilize ICTs to contact their doctor and 23% more likely to be interested in AR-related content. Patients with long-term AR or other allergies were less likely to use ICTs. Higher education and lower quality of life may increase AR app adoption by 4.8 times. Academic preparation five-fold increased ICT use for health provider communication. Mild-persistent allergic rhinitis 12 times enhanced the probabilities of using ICTs to share experiences and communicate with other patients. Conclusions: Our study found that moderate-to-severe AR individuals are not interested in information despite ICTs’ potential benefits. Consequently, allergists should use evidence-based resources and establish new technological options for content, follow-up, and emotional support for AR patients in Ecuador.