利用 ChatGPT 促进胎儿超声心动图检查的转诊。

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-04 DOI:10.1159/000539658
Lital Gordin Kopylov, Itai Goldrat, Ron Maymon, Ran Svirsky, Yifat Wiener, Eyal Klang
{"title":"利用 ChatGPT 促进胎儿超声心动图检查的转诊。","authors":"Lital Gordin Kopylov, Itai Goldrat, Ron Maymon, Ran Svirsky, Yifat Wiener, Eyal Klang","doi":"10.1159/000539658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>OpenAI's GPT-4 (artificial intelligence [AI]) is being studied for its use as a medical decision support tool. This research examines its accuracy in refining referrals for fetal echocardiography (FE) to improve early detection and outcomes related to congenital heart defects (CHDs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Past FE data referred to our institution were evaluated separately by pediatric cardiologist, gynecologist (human experts [experts]), and AI, according to established guidelines. We compared experts and AI's agreement on referral necessity, with experts addressing discrepancies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Total of 59 FE cases were addressed retrospectively. Cardiologist, gynecologist, and AI recommended performing FE in 47.5%, 49.2%, and 59.0% of cases, respectively. Comparing AI recommendations to experts indicated agreement of around 80.0% with both experts (p &lt; 0.001). Notably, AI suggested more echocardiographies for minor CHD (64.7%) compared to experts (47.1%), and for major CHD, experts recommended performing FE in all cases (100%) while AI recommended in majority of cases (90.9%). Discrepancies between AI and experts are detailed and reviewed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evaluation found moderate agreement between AI and experts. Contextual misunderstandings and lack of specialized medical knowledge limit AI, necessitating clinical guideline guidance. Despite shortcomings, AI's referrals comprised 65% of minor CHD cases versus experts 47%, suggesting its potential as a cautious decision aid for clinicians.</p>","PeriodicalId":12189,"journal":{"name":"Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"474-477"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Utilizing ChatGPT to Facilitate Referrals for Fetal Echocardiography.\",\"authors\":\"Lital Gordin Kopylov, Itai Goldrat, Ron Maymon, Ran Svirsky, Yifat Wiener, Eyal Klang\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000539658\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>OpenAI's GPT-4 (artificial intelligence [AI]) is being studied for its use as a medical decision support tool. This research examines its accuracy in refining referrals for fetal echocardiography (FE) to improve early detection and outcomes related to congenital heart defects (CHDs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Past FE data referred to our institution were evaluated separately by pediatric cardiologist, gynecologist (human experts [experts]), and AI, according to established guidelines. We compared experts and AI's agreement on referral necessity, with experts addressing discrepancies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Total of 59 FE cases were addressed retrospectively. Cardiologist, gynecologist, and AI recommended performing FE in 47.5%, 49.2%, and 59.0% of cases, respectively. Comparing AI recommendations to experts indicated agreement of around 80.0% with both experts (p &lt; 0.001). Notably, AI suggested more echocardiographies for minor CHD (64.7%) compared to experts (47.1%), and for major CHD, experts recommended performing FE in all cases (100%) while AI recommended in majority of cases (90.9%). Discrepancies between AI and experts are detailed and reviewed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evaluation found moderate agreement between AI and experts. Contextual misunderstandings and lack of specialized medical knowledge limit AI, necessitating clinical guideline guidance. Despite shortcomings, AI's referrals comprised 65% of minor CHD cases versus experts 47%, suggesting its potential as a cautious decision aid for clinicians.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"474-477\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000539658\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000539658","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言 OpenAI 的 GPT-4(人工智能 (AI))正被研究用作医疗决策支持工具。本研究探讨了它在改进胎儿超声心动图(FE)转诊方面的准确性,以改善先天性心脏缺陷的早期检测和预后。方法 根据既定指南,由儿科心脏病专家、妇科医生(人类专家(专家))和人工智能分别评估转诊至我院的过往胎儿超声心动图数据。我们比较了专家和人工智能对转诊必要性的一致意见,并由专家处理不一致之处。结果 共对 59 例 FE 病例进行了回顾性分析。心脏病专家、妇科医生和人工智能专家建议进行 FE 的比例分别为 47.5%、49.2% 和 59.0%。将人工智能的建议与专家的建议进行比较后发现,两位专家的建议一致率约为 80.0%(p< 0.001)。值得注意的是,与专家(47.1%)相比,人工智能建议对轻度冠心病(64.7%)进行更多的超声心动图检查,而对于重度冠心病,专家建议对所有病例(100%)进行超声心动图检查,而人工智能建议对大多数病例(90.9%)进行超声心动图检查。对人工智能和专家之间的差异进行了详细分析和回顾。结论 评估发现人工智能和专家之间的意见基本一致。语境误解和专业医学知识的缺乏限制了人工智能,因此需要临床指南的指导。尽管存在缺陷,但人工智能转介的轻微先天性心脏病病例占 65%,而专家转介的病例占 47%,这表明人工智能有可能成为临床医生谨慎决策的辅助工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Utilizing ChatGPT to Facilitate Referrals for Fetal Echocardiography.

Introduction: OpenAI's GPT-4 (artificial intelligence [AI]) is being studied for its use as a medical decision support tool. This research examines its accuracy in refining referrals for fetal echocardiography (FE) to improve early detection and outcomes related to congenital heart defects (CHDs).

Methods: Past FE data referred to our institution were evaluated separately by pediatric cardiologist, gynecologist (human experts [experts]), and AI, according to established guidelines. We compared experts and AI's agreement on referral necessity, with experts addressing discrepancies.

Results: Total of 59 FE cases were addressed retrospectively. Cardiologist, gynecologist, and AI recommended performing FE in 47.5%, 49.2%, and 59.0% of cases, respectively. Comparing AI recommendations to experts indicated agreement of around 80.0% with both experts (p < 0.001). Notably, AI suggested more echocardiographies for minor CHD (64.7%) compared to experts (47.1%), and for major CHD, experts recommended performing FE in all cases (100%) while AI recommended in majority of cases (90.9%). Discrepancies between AI and experts are detailed and reviewed.

Conclusions: The evaluation found moderate agreement between AI and experts. Contextual misunderstandings and lack of specialized medical knowledge limit AI, necessitating clinical guideline guidance. Despite shortcomings, AI's referrals comprised 65% of minor CHD cases versus experts 47%, suggesting its potential as a cautious decision aid for clinicians.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy
Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
48
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The first journal to focus on the fetus as a patient, ''Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy'' provides a wide range of biomedical specialists with a single source of reports encompassing the common discipline of fetal medicine.
×
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