The Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence ChatGPT in Oncology Examination Questions.

Ronald Chow, Shaakir Hasan, Ajay Zheng, Chenxi Gao, Gilmer Valdes, Francis Yu, Arpit Chhabra, Srinivas Raman, J Isabelle Choi, Haibo Lin, Charles B Simone
{"title":"The Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence ChatGPT in Oncology Examination Questions.","authors":"Ronald Chow, Shaakir Hasan, Ajay Zheng, Chenxi Gao, Gilmer Valdes, Francis Yu, Arpit Chhabra, Srinivas Raman, J Isabelle Choi, Haibo Lin, Charles B Simone","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2024.07.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) in response to oncology examination questions in the setting of one-shot learning. Consecutive national radiation oncology in-service multiple-choice examinations were collected and inputted into ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 3.5 to determine ChatGPT's answers. ChatGPT's answers were then compared with the answer keys to determine whether ChatGPT correctly or incorrectly answered each question and to determine if improvements in responses were seen with the newer ChatGPT version. A total of 600 consecutive questions were inputted into ChatGPT. ChatGPT 4o answered 72.2% questions correctly, whereas 3.5 answered 53.8% questions correctly. There was a significant difference in performance by question category (P < .01). ChatGPT performed poorer with respect to knowledge of landmark studies and treatment recommendations and planning. ChatGPT is a promising technology, with the latest version showing marked improvement. Although it still has limitations, with further evolution, it may be considered a reliable resource for medical training and decision making in the oncology space.</p>","PeriodicalId":73968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2024.07.011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) in response to oncology examination questions in the setting of one-shot learning. Consecutive national radiation oncology in-service multiple-choice examinations were collected and inputted into ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 3.5 to determine ChatGPT's answers. ChatGPT's answers were then compared with the answer keys to determine whether ChatGPT correctly or incorrectly answered each question and to determine if improvements in responses were seen with the newer ChatGPT version. A total of 600 consecutive questions were inputted into ChatGPT. ChatGPT 4o answered 72.2% questions correctly, whereas 3.5 answered 53.8% questions correctly. There was a significant difference in performance by question category (P < .01). ChatGPT performed poorer with respect to knowledge of landmark studies and treatment recommendations and planning. ChatGPT is a promising technology, with the latest version showing marked improvement. Although it still has limitations, with further evolution, it may be considered a reliable resource for medical training and decision making in the oncology space.

人工智能 ChatGPT 在肿瘤学试题中的准确性。
本研究旨在评估 ChatGPT 在一次性学习环境下回答肿瘤学考试问题的准确性。我们收集了连续的全国放射肿瘤学在职选择题考题,并将其输入 ChatGPT 4o 和 ChatGPT 3.5,以确定 ChatGPT 的答案。然后将 ChatGPT 的答案与答案密钥进行比较,以确定 ChatGPT 对每道题的回答是正确还是错误,并确定新版 ChatGPT 的回答是否有所改进。共向 ChatGPT 连续输入了 600 个问题。ChatGPT 4o 回答正确率为 72.2%,而 3.5 回答正确率为 53.8%。不同问题类别的表现差异很大(p < 0.01)。在对标志性研究和治疗建议/计划的了解方面,ChatGPT 的表现较差。ChatGPT 是一项很有前途的技术,最新版本有了明显改善。虽然它仍有局限性,但随着进一步发展,它可能会被视为肿瘤领域医学培训和决策制定的可靠资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信