Response to "Letter to the Editor-Exploring the Unknown: Evaluating ChatGPT's Performance in Uncovering Novel Aspects of Plastic Surgery and Identifying Areas for Future Innovation".

We appreciate Dr. Qi and Dr. Niu for their insightful comments on our study, "Exploring the Unknown: Evaluating ChatGPT's Performance in Uncovering Novel Aspects of Plastic Surgery and Identifying Areas for Future Innovation." Their observations underscore significant considerations in the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in plastic surgery. We agree with their concern about potential biases in ChatGPT's responses. The AI's frequent attribution of the title "parent of plastic surgery" to Sir Harold Delf Gillies, despite gender-neutral terminology, highlights underlying biases from training data. These biases often reflect historical texts and contemporary writings. Addressing them requires refining training datasets for balanced representation and developing algorithms that adjust dynamically to diverse inputs. The authors also question the criteria ChatGPT uses to identify key contributions to plastic surgery. The AI's focus on microsurgery, minimally invasive techniques, and tissue engineering, while significant, may prioritize keyword prevalence over a holistic evaluation. Enhancing ChatGPT's capabilities through targeted training and input from subject matter experts could improve the AI's ability to generate more balanced outputs. The identified bias favoring reconstructive over cosmetic procedures is another critical point. While reconstructive advancements are transformative, cosmetic surgery also has significant innovations. Ensuring ChatGPT presents a balanced view of both reconstructive and cosmetic advancements is essential. This can be achieved by diversifying training data and calibrating the AI to give equitable weight to different subspecialties within plastic surgery. AI models like ChatGPT are proficient in processing and generating information but lack the human elements of creativity, intuition, and emotional depth critical for groundbreaking innovations. AI should complement, not replace, the expert judgment and innovative thinking of skilled plastic surgeons. Ensuring the accuracy of AI-generated responses is crucial. Clinicians must verify AIgenerated information against established medical literature and clinical guidelines to maintain accuracy in medical practice. Continuous feedback and improvement mechanisms are vital to enhance AI's clinical utility. The improvement of AI in plastic surgery will be driven by active involvement from surgeons, providing comprehensive and balanced data for training to ensure AI systems evolve to support and enhance clinical practice effectively.Level of Evidence V This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors  www.springer.com/00266 .