Charlotte Zelin , Wendy K. Chung , Mederic Jeanne , Gongbo Zhang , Chunhua Weng
{"title":"Rare disease diagnosis using knowledge guided retrieval augmentation for ChatGPT","authors":"Charlotte Zelin , Wendy K. Chung , Mederic Jeanne , Gongbo Zhang , Chunhua Weng","doi":"10.1016/j.jbi.2024.104702","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Although rare diseases individually have a low prevalence, they collectively affect nearly 400 million individuals around the world. On average, it takes five years for an accurate rare disease diagnosis, but many patients remain undiagnosed or misdiagnosed. As machine learning technologies have been used to aid diagnostics in the past, this study aims to test ChatGPT’s suitability for rare disease diagnostic support with the enhancement provided by Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG). RareDxGPT, our enhanced ChatGPT model, supplies ChatGPT with information about 717 rare diseases from an external knowledge resource, the RareDis Corpus, through RAG. In RareDxGPT, when a query is entered, the three documents most relevant to the query in the RareDis Corpus are retrieved. Along with the query, they are returned to ChatGPT to provide a diagnosis. Additionally, phenotypes for thirty different diseases were extracted from free text from PubMed’s Case Reports. They were each entered with three different prompt types: “prompt”, “prompt + explanation” and “prompt + role play.” The accuracy of ChatGPT and RareDxGPT with each prompt was then measured. With “Prompt”, RareDxGPT had a 40 % accuracy, while ChatGPT 3.5 got 37 % of the cases correct. With “Prompt + Explanation”, RareDxGPT had a 43 % accuracy, while ChatGPT 3.5 got 23 % of the cases correct. With “Prompt + Role Play”, RareDxGPT had a 40 % accuracy, while ChatGPT 3.5 got 23 % of the cases correct. To conclude, ChatGPT, especially when supplying extra domain specific knowledge, demonstrates early potential for rare disease diagnosis with adjustments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15263,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biomedical Informatics","volume":"157 ","pages":"Article 104702"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biomedical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046424001205","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Although rare diseases individually have a low prevalence, they collectively affect nearly 400 million individuals around the world. On average, it takes five years for an accurate rare disease diagnosis, but many patients remain undiagnosed or misdiagnosed. As machine learning technologies have been used to aid diagnostics in the past, this study aims to test ChatGPT’s suitability for rare disease diagnostic support with the enhancement provided by Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG). RareDxGPT, our enhanced ChatGPT model, supplies ChatGPT with information about 717 rare diseases from an external knowledge resource, the RareDis Corpus, through RAG. In RareDxGPT, when a query is entered, the three documents most relevant to the query in the RareDis Corpus are retrieved. Along with the query, they are returned to ChatGPT to provide a diagnosis. Additionally, phenotypes for thirty different diseases were extracted from free text from PubMed’s Case Reports. They were each entered with three different prompt types: “prompt”, “prompt + explanation” and “prompt + role play.” The accuracy of ChatGPT and RareDxGPT with each prompt was then measured. With “Prompt”, RareDxGPT had a 40 % accuracy, while ChatGPT 3.5 got 37 % of the cases correct. With “Prompt + Explanation”, RareDxGPT had a 43 % accuracy, while ChatGPT 3.5 got 23 % of the cases correct. With “Prompt + Role Play”, RareDxGPT had a 40 % accuracy, while ChatGPT 3.5 got 23 % of the cases correct. To conclude, ChatGPT, especially when supplying extra domain specific knowledge, demonstrates early potential for rare disease diagnosis with adjustments.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomedical Informatics reflects a commitment to high-quality original research papers, reviews, and commentaries in the area of biomedical informatics methodology. Although we publish articles motivated by applications in the biomedical sciences (for example, clinical medicine, health care, population health, and translational bioinformatics), the journal emphasizes reports of new methodologies and techniques that have general applicability and that form the basis for the evolving science of biomedical informatics. Articles on medical devices; evaluations of implemented systems (including clinical trials of information technologies); or papers that provide insight into a biological process, a specific disease, or treatment options would generally be more suitable for publication in other venues. Papers on applications of signal processing and image analysis are often more suitable for biomedical engineering journals or other informatics journals, although we do publish papers that emphasize the information management and knowledge representation/modeling issues that arise in the storage and use of biological signals and images. System descriptions are welcome if they illustrate and substantiate the underlying methodology that is the principal focus of the report and an effort is made to address the generalizability and/or range of application of that methodology. Note also that, given the international nature of JBI, papers that deal with specific languages other than English, or with country-specific health systems or approaches, are acceptable for JBI only if they offer generalizable lessons that are relevant to the broad JBI readership, regardless of their country, language, culture, or health system.