The PERFORM Study: Artificial Intelligence Versus Human Residents in Cross-Sectional Obstetrics-Gynecology Scenarios Across Languages and Time Constraints

Canio Martinelli MD , Antonio Giordano MD , Vincenzo Carnevale PhD , Sharon Raffaella Burk PhD , Lavinia Porto MD , Giuseppe Vizzielli MD , Alfredo Ercoli MD
{"title":"The PERFORM Study: Artificial Intelligence Versus Human Residents in Cross-Sectional Obstetrics-Gynecology Scenarios Across Languages and Time Constraints","authors":"Canio Martinelli MD ,&nbsp;Antonio Giordano MD ,&nbsp;Vincenzo Carnevale PhD ,&nbsp;Sharon Raffaella Burk PhD ,&nbsp;Lavinia Porto MD ,&nbsp;Giuseppe Vizzielli MD ,&nbsp;Alfredo Ercoli MD","doi":"10.1016/j.mcpdig.2025.100206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To systematically evaluate the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) large language models (LLMs) compared with obstetrics-gynecology residents in clinical decision-making, examining diagnostic accuracy and error patterns across linguistic domains, time constraints, and experience levels.</div></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><div>In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated 8 AI LLMs and 24 obstetrics-gynecology residents (Years 1-5) using 60 standardized clinical scenarios. Most AI LLMs and all residents were assessed in May 2024, whereas chat GPT-01-preview, chat-GPT4o, and Claude Sonnet 3.5 were evaluated in November 2024. The assessment framework incorporated English and Italian scenarios under both timed and untimed conditions, along with systematic error pattern analysis. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy; secondary end points included AI system stratification, resident progression, language impact, time pressure effects, and integration potential.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The AI LLMs reported superior overall accuracy (73.75%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 69.64%-77.49%) compared with residents (65.35%; 95% CI, 62.85%-67.76%; <em>P</em>&lt;.001). High-performing AI systems (ChatGPT-01-preview, GPT4o, and Claude Sonnet 3.5) achieved consistently high cross-linguistic accuracy (88.33%) with minimal language impact (6.67%±0.00%). Resident performance declined significantly under time constraints (from 73.2% to 56.5% adjusted accuracy; Cohen’s d=1.009; <em>P</em>&lt;.001), whereas AI systems reported lesser deterioration. Error pattern analysis indicated a moderate correlation between AI and human reasoning (r=0.666; <em>P</em>&lt;.001). Residents exhibited systematic progression from year 1 (44.7%) to year 5 (87.1%). Integration analysis found variable benefits across training levels, with maximum enhancement in early-career residents (+29.7%; <em>P</em>&lt;.001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>High-performing AI LLMs reported strong diagnostic accuracy and resilience under linguistic and temporal pressures. These findings suggest that AI-enhanced decision-making may offer particular benefits in obstetrics and gynecology training programs, especially for junior residents, by improving diagnostic consistency and potentially reducing cognitive load in time-sensitive clinical settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74127,"journal":{"name":"Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Digital health","volume":"3 2","pages":"Article 100206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949761225000136","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

Objective

To systematically evaluate the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) large language models (LLMs) compared with obstetrics-gynecology residents in clinical decision-making, examining diagnostic accuracy and error patterns across linguistic domains, time constraints, and experience levels.

Patients and Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated 8 AI LLMs and 24 obstetrics-gynecology residents (Years 1-5) using 60 standardized clinical scenarios. Most AI LLMs and all residents were assessed in May 2024, whereas chat GPT-01-preview, chat-GPT4o, and Claude Sonnet 3.5 were evaluated in November 2024. The assessment framework incorporated English and Italian scenarios under both timed and untimed conditions, along with systematic error pattern analysis. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy; secondary end points included AI system stratification, resident progression, language impact, time pressure effects, and integration potential.

Results

The AI LLMs reported superior overall accuracy (73.75%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 69.64%-77.49%) compared with residents (65.35%; 95% CI, 62.85%-67.76%; P<.001). High-performing AI systems (ChatGPT-01-preview, GPT4o, and Claude Sonnet 3.5) achieved consistently high cross-linguistic accuracy (88.33%) with minimal language impact (6.67%±0.00%). Resident performance declined significantly under time constraints (from 73.2% to 56.5% adjusted accuracy; Cohen’s d=1.009; P<.001), whereas AI systems reported lesser deterioration. Error pattern analysis indicated a moderate correlation between AI and human reasoning (r=0.666; P<.001). Residents exhibited systematic progression from year 1 (44.7%) to year 5 (87.1%). Integration analysis found variable benefits across training levels, with maximum enhancement in early-career residents (+29.7%; P<.001).

Conclusion

High-performing AI LLMs reported strong diagnostic accuracy and resilience under linguistic and temporal pressures. These findings suggest that AI-enhanced decision-making may offer particular benefits in obstetrics and gynecology training programs, especially for junior residents, by improving diagnostic consistency and potentially reducing cognitive load in time-sensitive clinical settings.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Digital health
Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Digital health Medicine and Dentistry (General), Health Informatics, Public Health and Health Policy
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 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