AI chatbots have been created as digital tools to help improve patient education by answering common questions about cancer diagnosis, treatment options, symptoms, and care pathways. One widely used example is OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which can generate medically relevant responses to various queries. These chatbots use clinical data and trusted knowledge bases to provide information any time, potentially making cancer care education more accessible to patients.
A major study led by Dr. Danielle Bitterman at Mass General Brigham assessed how accurate AI chatbots are in answering cancer-related questions. The study found that nearly all chatbot answers included at least one treatment aligned with expert clinical guidelines, such as those from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). This shows AI’s possible use as an informational aid in oncology care. However, the study also pointed out ongoing reliability issues. About 34.3% of chatbot responses contained at least one treatment recommendation that conflicted with established standards. In addition, 13% of replies had suggestions that were either nonsensical or not supported by clinical practice.
These errors raise concerns, especially about patient safety and trustworthiness of information. Dr. Bitterman stressed that AI is not yet ready to replace medical professionals in providing cancer care guidance. Similarly, Dr. Abdo Kabarriti from SUNY Downstate noted that while AI chatbots can offer cancer information, they do not substitute the nuanced clinical judgment oncologists provide.
Many evaluations identified a common problem: the language used by AI chatbots in cancer communication is often too complex. Most responses were written at a college reading level, which can be hard for average patients to understand. This is important because clear language and accessibility are key to effective patient communication and health literacy. Patients with limited medical knowledge or lower reading skills may misinterpret or misunderstand technical explanations, leading to confusion or worry.
Balancing accurate clinical information with accessibility is still a challenge. While AI chatbots generate responses based on extensive clinical guidelines and reputable sources like the American Cancer Society and Mayo Clinic, they often include medical jargon that is not easy for the general public. This limits how effective chatbots can be unless healthcare providers help clarify and provide context.
A review of literature related to colorectal surgery patient education supported these findings. Studies involving colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, and similar conditions showed that chatbots helped by providing clearer answers to common questions. However, they had difficulty handling patient-specific or complex queries. Healthcare professionals voiced concerns about chatbot use in clinical settings where precision and detailed understanding of patients’ needs are crucial.
The research indicated that AI chatbots should be seen as complementary tools rather than replacements for professional medical advice. They may help with general education, repeat basic information shared during visits, and ease the workload on medical staff by answering routine questions. Yet, when it comes to personalized treatment discussions, clinical decisions, and detailed patient counseling, human expertise is still necessary.
AI use in U.S. healthcare is growing quickly. The market for AI healthcare technologies increased from $11 billion in 2021 and is expected to reach $187 billion by 2030. Large technology companies like Apple, Microsoft, and IBM are investing heavily, showing confidence in AI’s role in clinical diagnosis, patient monitoring, and administrative tasks.
AI can analyze large amounts of clinical data much faster than humans, improving diagnosis accuracy, tailoring treatments, and predicting disease progression. For example, AI algorithms have outperformed human radiologists in detecting early-stage cancers by processing medical images quickly and precisely. These improvements support earlier treatment and better patient outcomes.
Despite these advances, there are still obstacles to widespread AI adoption. Privacy concerns, challenges integrating AI with existing health IT systems, and clinicians’ trust issues slow implementation. Surveys show nearly 70% of doctors hesitate to rely on AI for diagnoses, often due to doubts about accuracy and transparency. Healthcare administrators in the U.S. must therefore evaluate AI tools carefully and keep appropriate human oversight in place.
Beyond clinical information, AI is also useful in healthcare administration. One growing area involves AI-driven front-office phone automation and answering services, such as those provided by companies like Simbo AI.
Handling patient calls, scheduling appointments, and answering routine questions consumes significant administrative resources. AI-powered systems that understand natural language can manage high call volumes, respond to basic questions, and refer patients to the right staff members promptly. For medical practice administrators and IT staff, using these technologies can lower wait times, reduce errors, and allow personnel to focus on more complex patient needs.
Simbo AI’s front-office automation supports call centers and reception desks by recognizing caller intent, giving clear information, and transferring calls smoothly when necessary. These systems can:
Cancer care often requires complex visits involving multiple steps. Automated phone communication helps by delivering reminders, medication guidance, or directions without patients needing to wait for an operator, which can improve satisfaction and adherence to treatment plans.
AI front-office tools can also connect with electronic health records (EHR) and practice management software. This integration keeps appointment details, patient data, and clinical notes consistent. Automating routine administrative tasks lets practice leaders scale operations and redirect resources toward direct patient care.
Research shows AI chatbots can be helpful but have limitations, especially in giving cancer treatment information. Experts agree that development, ongoing testing, and strong performance standards are essential for safe incorporation of AI into U.S. healthcare.
Researchers like Dr. Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou have pointed out the need to recognize bias in AI training data, which may affect chatbot advice and increase disparities. Continuous improvement and real-world testing should be main priorities, along with regulatory guidelines and clinical standards for AI in patient education.
Human oversight is crucial to reduce risks tied to inaccurate or overly complex responses. Healthcare providers should use AI chatbots as additional tools that support clinical discussions rather than replace them. Patients should be educated on how to use AI information properly, and clear disclaimers about AI limits can help maintain trust and safety.
As AI technology advances, medical practice administrators and IT managers in the U.S. must balance benefits with risks when using AI chatbots in oncology. Current evidence suggests:
Healthcare leaders should involve teams from oncology, IT, compliance, and patient groups when planning AI use. Piloting chatbots with real patients under supervision helps measure effectiveness and usability.
Ongoing education about AI within clinical teams ensures that integration is done properly and helps build trust. As the U.S. healthcare system finds a balance between technology and patient safety, careful use of AI, supported by companies like Simbo AI, will be important in meeting administrative needs and improving patient communication.
By understanding both strengths and limitations of AI chatbots in providing cancer information and combining them with workflow automation, medical practices can improve efficiency while maintaining quality patient care in an increasingly digital healthcare environment.
AI chatbots can provide accurate information about cancer, but studies show their responses often contain errors, omissions, and overly technical language that may not be understandable to patients.
AI chatbots may generate responses that include incorrect treatment recommendations, making it difficult for patients to trust the information provided.
Researchers compared chatbot-generated answers to established clinical guidelines like the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines.
About 34.3% of the responses generated by ChatGPT included at least one treatment recommendation that did not align with clinical guidelines.
Experts agree that chatbots cannot replace doctors, as they lack the nuance and understanding required to provide personalized medical advice.
AI chatbots could serve as supplementary resources, helping reinforce information discussed during medical appointments.
Many responses were found to be too complex for average patients to understand, often written at a college reading level.
Researchers emphasize the need for more accurate AI models trained specifically on clinical data to improve the reliability of chatbot responses.
There is a risk that patients may take chatbot advice at face value, which could compromise their safety if inaccurate information is provided.
AI could democratize access to best practices in cancer care, allowing any healthcare provider with internet access to obtain expert-level recommendations.
Simbo is using AI agents to automate all phone related workflows. Connect now to know more.
Schedule AI Agents Demo Now© Since 2019, Simbo AI.
