Large Language Models in the Diagnosis of Hand and Peripheral Nerve Injuries: An Evaluation of ChatGPT and the Isabel Differential Diagnosis Generator

Q3 Medicine
Abdullah AlShenaiber BHSc , Shaishav Datta HBSc, MD , Adam J. Mosa MD, MSc , Paul A. Binhammer MD, MSc , Edsel B. Ing MD, MPH, PhD
{"title":"Large Language Models in the Diagnosis of Hand and Peripheral Nerve Injuries: An Evaluation of ChatGPT and the Isabel Differential Diagnosis Generator","authors":"Abdullah AlShenaiber BHSc ,&nbsp;Shaishav Datta HBSc, MD ,&nbsp;Adam J. Mosa MD, MSc ,&nbsp;Paul A. Binhammer MD, MSc ,&nbsp;Edsel B. Ing MD, MPH, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jhsg.2024.07.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Tools using artificial intelligence may help reduce missed or delayed diagnoses and improve patient care in hand surgery. This study aimed to compare and evaluate the performance of two natural language processing programs, Isabel and ChatGPT-4, in diagnosing hand and peripheral nerve injuries from a set of clinical vignettes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Cases from a virtual library of hand surgery case reports with no history of trauma or previous surgery were included in this study. The clinical details (age, sex, symptoms, signs, and medical history) of 16 hand cases were entered into Isabel and ChatGPT-4 to generate top 10 differential diagnosis lists. Isabel and ChatGPT-4’s inclusion and median rank of the correct diagnosis within each list were compared. Two hand surgeons were then provided each list and asked to independently evaluate the performance of the two systems.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Isabel correctly identified 7/16 (44%) cases with a median rank of two (interquartile range = 3). ChatGPT-4 correctly identified 14/16 (88%) of cases with a median rank of one (interquartile range = 1). Physicians one and two, respectively, preferred the lists generated by ChatGPT-4 in 12/16 (75%) and 13/16 (81%) of cases and had no preference in 2/16 (13%) cases.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>ChatGPT-4 had significantly greater diagnostic accuracy within our sample (<em>P</em> &lt; .05) and generated higher quality differential diagnoses than Isabel. Isabel produced several inappropriate and imprecise differential diagnoses.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical relevance</h3><div>Despite large language models’ potential utility in generating medical diagnoses, physicians must continue to exercise high caution and use their clinical judgment when making diagnostic decisions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36920,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online","volume":"6 6","pages":"Pages 847-854"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589514124001543","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Tools using artificial intelligence may help reduce missed or delayed diagnoses and improve patient care in hand surgery. This study aimed to compare and evaluate the performance of two natural language processing programs, Isabel and ChatGPT-4, in diagnosing hand and peripheral nerve injuries from a set of clinical vignettes.

Methods

Cases from a virtual library of hand surgery case reports with no history of trauma or previous surgery were included in this study. The clinical details (age, sex, symptoms, signs, and medical history) of 16 hand cases were entered into Isabel and ChatGPT-4 to generate top 10 differential diagnosis lists. Isabel and ChatGPT-4’s inclusion and median rank of the correct diagnosis within each list were compared. Two hand surgeons were then provided each list and asked to independently evaluate the performance of the two systems.

Results

Isabel correctly identified 7/16 (44%) cases with a median rank of two (interquartile range = 3). ChatGPT-4 correctly identified 14/16 (88%) of cases with a median rank of one (interquartile range = 1). Physicians one and two, respectively, preferred the lists generated by ChatGPT-4 in 12/16 (75%) and 13/16 (81%) of cases and had no preference in 2/16 (13%) cases.

Conclusions

ChatGPT-4 had significantly greater diagnostic accuracy within our sample (P < .05) and generated higher quality differential diagnoses than Isabel. Isabel produced several inappropriate and imprecise differential diagnoses.

Clinical relevance

Despite large language models’ potential utility in generating medical diagnoses, physicians must continue to exercise high caution and use their clinical judgment when making diagnostic decisions.
手部和周围神经损伤诊断中的大型语言模型:对 ChatGPT 和伊莎贝尔鉴别诊断生成器的评估
目的 人工智能工具有助于减少手外科的漏诊或延误诊断,改善患者护理。本研究旨在比较和评估两个自然语言处理程序 Isabel 和 ChatGPT-4 在根据一组临床病例诊断手部和周围神经损伤方面的性能。将 16 个手部病例的临床细节(年龄、性别、症状、体征和病史)输入 Isabel 和 ChatGPT-4,生成前 10 个鉴别诊断列表。比较了伊莎贝尔和 ChatGPT-4 在每个列表中的纳入率和正确诊断的中位数排名。结果伊莎贝尔正确识别了 7/16 个病例(44%),中位数为 2(四分位间范围 = 3)。ChatGPT-4 能正确识别 14/16 个病例(88%),中位排名为 1(四分位间范围 = 1)。在 12/16 (75%) 和 13/16 (81%) 的病例中,医生一和医生二分别偏好 ChatGPT-4 生成的清单,而在 2/16 (13%) 的病例中则没有偏好。临床相关性尽管大语言模型在生成医学诊断方面具有潜在的实用性,但医生在做出诊断决定时必须继续保持高度谨慎,并运用他们的临床判断。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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