Evaluation of GPT-4 concordance with north American spine society guidelines for lumbar fusion surgery

Q3 Medicine
Ara Khoylyan BS , Jason Salvato BS , Frank Vazquez BSAT , Mina Girgis MD , Alex Tang MD , Tan Chen MD FRCSC FACS
{"title":"Evaluation of GPT-4 concordance with north American spine society guidelines for lumbar fusion surgery","authors":"Ara Khoylyan BS ,&nbsp;Jason Salvato BS ,&nbsp;Frank Vazquez BSAT ,&nbsp;Mina Girgis MD ,&nbsp;Alex Tang MD ,&nbsp;Tan Chen MD FRCSC FACS","doi":"10.1016/j.xnsj.2024.100580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Concordance with evidence-based medicine (EBM) guidelines is associated with improved clinical outcomes in spine surgery. The North American Spine Society (NASS) has published coverage guidelines on indications for lumbar fusion surgery, with a recent survey demonstrating a 60% concordance rate across its members. GPT-4 is a popular deep learning model that receives knowledge training across public databases including those containing EBM guidelines. There is prior research exploring the potential utility of artificial intelligence (AI) software in adherence with spine surgery practices and guidelines, inviting opportunity to further investigate application in the setting of lumbar fusion surgery with current AI models.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Seventeen well-validated clinical vignettes with specific indications for or against lumbar fusion based on NASS criteria were obtained from a prior published research study. Each case was transcribed into a standardized prompt and entered into GPT-4 to obtain a decision whether fusion is indicated. Interquery reliability was assessed with serial identical queries utilizing the Fleiss’ Kappa statistic. Majority response among serial queries was considered as the final GPT-4 decision. Queries were all entered in separate strings. The investigator entering the prompts was blinded to the NASS-concordant decisions for the cases prior to complete data collection. Decisions by GPT-4 and NASS guidelines were compared with Chi-square analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>GPT-4 responses for 15/17 (88.2%) of the clinical vignettes were in concordance with NASS EBM lumbar fusion guidelines. There was a significant association in clinical decision-making when determining indication for spine fusion surgery between GPT-4 and NASS guidelines (χ² = 9.75; p&lt;.01). There was substantial agreement among the sets of responses generated by GPT-4 for each clinical case (K = 0.71; p&lt;.001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>There is significant concordance between GPT-4 responses and NASS EBM indications for lumbar fusion surgery. AI and deep learning models may prove to be an effective adjunct tool for clinical decision-making within modern spine surgery practices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34622,"journal":{"name":"North American Spine Society Journal","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100580"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North American Spine Society Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548424002737","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

Background

Concordance with evidence-based medicine (EBM) guidelines is associated with improved clinical outcomes in spine surgery. The North American Spine Society (NASS) has published coverage guidelines on indications for lumbar fusion surgery, with a recent survey demonstrating a 60% concordance rate across its members. GPT-4 is a popular deep learning model that receives knowledge training across public databases including those containing EBM guidelines. There is prior research exploring the potential utility of artificial intelligence (AI) software in adherence with spine surgery practices and guidelines, inviting opportunity to further investigate application in the setting of lumbar fusion surgery with current AI models.

Methods

Seventeen well-validated clinical vignettes with specific indications for or against lumbar fusion based on NASS criteria were obtained from a prior published research study. Each case was transcribed into a standardized prompt and entered into GPT-4 to obtain a decision whether fusion is indicated. Interquery reliability was assessed with serial identical queries utilizing the Fleiss’ Kappa statistic. Majority response among serial queries was considered as the final GPT-4 decision. Queries were all entered in separate strings. The investigator entering the prompts was blinded to the NASS-concordant decisions for the cases prior to complete data collection. Decisions by GPT-4 and NASS guidelines were compared with Chi-square analysis.

Results

GPT-4 responses for 15/17 (88.2%) of the clinical vignettes were in concordance with NASS EBM lumbar fusion guidelines. There was a significant association in clinical decision-making when determining indication for spine fusion surgery between GPT-4 and NASS guidelines (χ² = 9.75; p<.01). There was substantial agreement among the sets of responses generated by GPT-4 for each clinical case (K = 0.71; p<.001).

Conclusions

There is significant concordance between GPT-4 responses and NASS EBM indications for lumbar fusion surgery. AI and deep learning models may prove to be an effective adjunct tool for clinical decision-making within modern spine surgery practices.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
48 days
×
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