Objective:

To compare the performance of ChatGPT, Google Translate, and UD Talk in translating Chinese to Japanese during real-world medical consultations.

Approach:

Key Findings:

• Professional interpreters provide more accurate translations than untrained individuals.
• Google Translate has variable accuracy in medical contexts, with significant errors reported.
• UD Talk integrates speech recognition and machine translation but is primarily designed for live interpretation.
• ChatGPT captures linguistic nuance and contextual meaning effectively.

Interpretation:

The study clarifies the feasibility and limitations of AI-assisted translation tools in clinical settings.

Limitations:

• The study was conducted at a single center, which may limit generalizability.
• Participants were excluded if they could not communicate effectively due to medical or cognitive conditions.

Conclusion:

The study evaluates the effectiveness of translation tools in enhancing communication in outpatient settings.

Attribution Notice

This content is an AI-generated, fully rewritten summary based on a published scholarly article. It does not reproduce the original text and is not a substitute for the original publication. Readers are encouraged to consult the source for full context, data, and methodology.