Assessing the clinical support capabilities of ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 4o mini in managing lumbar disc herniation.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Suning Wang, Ying Wang, Linlin Jiang, Yong Chang, Shiji Zhang, Kun Zhao, Lu Chen, Chunzheng Gao
{"title":"Assessing the clinical support capabilities of ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 4o mini in managing lumbar disc herniation.","authors":"Suning Wang, Ying Wang, Linlin Jiang, Yong Chang, Shiji Zhang, Kun Zhao, Lu Chen, Chunzheng Gao","doi":"10.1186/s40001-025-02296-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated and compared the clinical support capabilities of ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 4o mini in diagnosing and treating lumbar disc herniation (LDH) with radiculopathy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-one questions (across 5 categories) from NASS Clinical Guidelines were input into ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 4o mini. Five orthopedic surgeons assessed their responses using a 5-point Likert scale for accuracy and completeness, and a 7-point scale for reliability. Flesch Reading Ease scores were calculated to assess readability. Additionally, ChatGPT 4o analyzed lumbar images from 53 patients, comparing its recognizable agreement with orthopedic surgeons using Kappa values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both models demonstrated strong clinical support capabilities with no significant differences in accuracy or reliability. However, ChatGPT 4o provided more comprehensive and consistent responses. The Flesch Reading Ease scores for both models indicated that their generated content was \"very difficult to read,\" potentially limiting patient accessibility. In evaluating lumbar disc herniation images, ChatGPT 4o achieved an overall accuracy of 0.81, with LDH recognition precision, recall, and F1 scores exceeding 0.80. The AUC was 0.80, and the Kappa value was 0.61, indicating moderate agreement between the model's predictions and actual diagnoses, though with room for improvement.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While both models are effective, ChatGPT 4o offers more comprehensive clinical responses, making it more suitable for high-integrity medical tasks. However, the difficulty in reading AI-generated content and occasional use of misleading terms, such as \"tumor,\" indicate a need for further improvements to reduce patient anxiety.</p>","PeriodicalId":11949,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Medical Research","volume":"30 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11753088/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-025-02296-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated and compared the clinical support capabilities of ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 4o mini in diagnosing and treating lumbar disc herniation (LDH) with radiculopathy.

Methods: Twenty-one questions (across 5 categories) from NASS Clinical Guidelines were input into ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 4o mini. Five orthopedic surgeons assessed their responses using a 5-point Likert scale for accuracy and completeness, and a 7-point scale for reliability. Flesch Reading Ease scores were calculated to assess readability. Additionally, ChatGPT 4o analyzed lumbar images from 53 patients, comparing its recognizable agreement with orthopedic surgeons using Kappa values.

Results: Both models demonstrated strong clinical support capabilities with no significant differences in accuracy or reliability. However, ChatGPT 4o provided more comprehensive and consistent responses. The Flesch Reading Ease scores for both models indicated that their generated content was "very difficult to read," potentially limiting patient accessibility. In evaluating lumbar disc herniation images, ChatGPT 4o achieved an overall accuracy of 0.81, with LDH recognition precision, recall, and F1 scores exceeding 0.80. The AUC was 0.80, and the Kappa value was 0.61, indicating moderate agreement between the model's predictions and actual diagnoses, though with room for improvement.

Conclusion: While both models are effective, ChatGPT 4o offers more comprehensive clinical responses, making it more suitable for high-integrity medical tasks. However, the difficulty in reading AI-generated content and occasional use of misleading terms, such as "tumor," indicate a need for further improvements to reduce patient anxiety.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Medical Research
European Journal of Medical Research 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
247
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: European Journal of Medical Research publishes translational and clinical research of international interest across all medical disciplines, enabling clinicians and other researchers to learn about developments and innovations within these disciplines and across the boundaries between disciplines. The journal publishes high quality research and reviews and aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted research are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
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