NeuroGPT, 评估 ChatGPT:72 名神经病患者的诊断和治疗

Q4 Medicine
Alejandro Fernández Cabrera , Jesús García de Soto , Paula Santamaría Montero , Héctor Chinea García , Robustiano Pego Reigosa
{"title":"NeuroGPT, 评估 ChatGPT:72 名神经病患者的诊断和治疗","authors":"Alejandro Fernández Cabrera ,&nbsp;Jesús García de Soto ,&nbsp;Paula Santamaría Montero ,&nbsp;Héctor Chinea García ,&nbsp;Robustiano Pego Reigosa","doi":"10.1016/j.neuarg.2024.08.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>There has been a significant boom in the field of artificial intelligence in recent years, especially in terms of accessibility and its use in different areas. This study attempts to determine if an AI can diagnose neurology patients.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To evaluate the utility and accuracy of ChatGPT 3.5 as a tool for conducting patient history, diagnosis, and treatment in cases of neurological pathology.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>A descriptive qualitative observational study was conducted, without intervention in patients, focused on evaluating the utility and accuracy of ChatGPT 3.5 for taking patient history, diagnosis, and treatment in patients with neurological pathology. The information provided to the neurologist was entered into the language model. Subsequently, the questions determined by ChatGPT were asked, and the complete neurological examination was provided. ChatGPT's diagnosis was compared with that of two different neurologists. Recruitment took place from May 2022 to June 2023 in a neurology consultation at a medium-sized hospital in Spain.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 72 patients (median age 58.71 years and 55.6% female) were enrolled in this study. Complementary tests suggested by the AI were considered correct in 33.3% of cases. The accuracy of the AI's diagnosis was 44.4%, and treatment recommendations were correct in 37.5%. The diagnosis was checked by two different neurologists following the latest national and international Neurology guidelines. In most cases, the diagnosis between the two neurologists agreed, with a kappa coefficient of 0.94.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Although we are in an unprecedented era of advancement in the field of artificial intelligence, it does not seem that ChatGPT can currently replace the evaluation of a neurology specialist.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39051,"journal":{"name":"Neurologia Argentina","volume":"16 3","pages":"Pages 136-141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"NeuroGPT, evaluando ChatGPT: Diagnóstico y tratamiento de 72 pacientes neurológicos\",\"authors\":\"Alejandro Fernández Cabrera ,&nbsp;Jesús García de Soto ,&nbsp;Paula Santamaría Montero ,&nbsp;Héctor Chinea García ,&nbsp;Robustiano Pego Reigosa\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.neuarg.2024.08.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>There has been a significant boom in the field of artificial intelligence in recent years, especially in terms of accessibility and its use in different areas. This study attempts to determine if an AI can diagnose neurology patients.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To evaluate the utility and accuracy of ChatGPT 3.5 as a tool for conducting patient history, diagnosis, and treatment in cases of neurological pathology.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>A descriptive qualitative observational study was conducted, without intervention in patients, focused on evaluating the utility and accuracy of ChatGPT 3.5 for taking patient history, diagnosis, and treatment in patients with neurological pathology. The information provided to the neurologist was entered into the language model. Subsequently, the questions determined by ChatGPT were asked, and the complete neurological examination was provided. ChatGPT's diagnosis was compared with that of two different neurologists. Recruitment took place from May 2022 to June 2023 in a neurology consultation at a medium-sized hospital in Spain.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 72 patients (median age 58.71 years and 55.6% female) were enrolled in this study. Complementary tests suggested by the AI were considered correct in 33.3% of cases. The accuracy of the AI's diagnosis was 44.4%, and treatment recommendations were correct in 37.5%. The diagnosis was checked by two different neurologists following the latest national and international Neurology guidelines. In most cases, the diagnosis between the two neurologists agreed, with a kappa coefficient of 0.94.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Although we are in an unprecedented era of advancement in the field of artificial intelligence, it does not seem that ChatGPT can currently replace the evaluation of a neurology specialist.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39051,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurologia Argentina\",\"volume\":\"16 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 136-141\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurologia Argentina\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S185300282400034X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurologia Argentina","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S185300282400034X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言近年来,人工智能领域蓬勃发展,尤其是在可访问性及其在不同领域的应用方面。本研究试图确定人工智能是否能诊断神经病学患者。目的评估 ChatGPT 3.5 作为神经病学病例的病史采集、诊断和治疗工具的实用性和准确性。材料和方法在不对患者进行干预的情况下,进行了一项描述性定性观察研究,重点评估 ChatGPT 3.5 在神经病学病例的病史采集、诊断和治疗方面的实用性和准确性。向神经科医生提供的信息被输入到语言模型中。随后,询问 ChatGPT 确定的问题,并提供完整的神经系统检查。ChatGPT 的诊断结果与两位不同神经科医生的诊断结果进行了比较。本研究于 2022 年 5 月至 2023 年 6 月在西班牙一家中型医院的神经科会诊中招募了 72 名患者(中位年龄 58.71 岁,55.6% 为女性)。33.3%的病例认为人工智能建议的辅助检查是正确的。人工智能诊断的准确率为 44.4%,治疗建议的正确率为 37.5%。诊断由两名不同的神经病学专家根据最新的国内和国际神经病学指南进行核对。在大多数情况下,两位神经科医生的诊断结果一致,卡帕系数为 0.94。结论虽然我们正处于人工智能领域前所未有的进步时代,但目前看来 ChatGPT 还不能取代神经科专家的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
NeuroGPT, evaluando ChatGPT: Diagnóstico y tratamiento de 72 pacientes neurológicos

Introduction

There has been a significant boom in the field of artificial intelligence in recent years, especially in terms of accessibility and its use in different areas. This study attempts to determine if an AI can diagnose neurology patients.

Objective

To evaluate the utility and accuracy of ChatGPT 3.5 as a tool for conducting patient history, diagnosis, and treatment in cases of neurological pathology.

Materials and methods

A descriptive qualitative observational study was conducted, without intervention in patients, focused on evaluating the utility and accuracy of ChatGPT 3.5 for taking patient history, diagnosis, and treatment in patients with neurological pathology. The information provided to the neurologist was entered into the language model. Subsequently, the questions determined by ChatGPT were asked, and the complete neurological examination was provided. ChatGPT's diagnosis was compared with that of two different neurologists. Recruitment took place from May 2022 to June 2023 in a neurology consultation at a medium-sized hospital in Spain.

Results

A total of 72 patients (median age 58.71 years and 55.6% female) were enrolled in this study. Complementary tests suggested by the AI were considered correct in 33.3% of cases. The accuracy of the AI's diagnosis was 44.4%, and treatment recommendations were correct in 37.5%. The diagnosis was checked by two different neurologists following the latest national and international Neurology guidelines. In most cases, the diagnosis between the two neurologists agreed, with a kappa coefficient of 0.94.

Conclusions

Although we are in an unprecedented era of advancement in the field of artificial intelligence, it does not seem that ChatGPT can currently replace the evaluation of a neurology specialist.

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
Neurologia Argentina
Neurologia Argentina Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Neurología Argentina es la publicación oficial de la Sociedad Neurológica Argentina. Todos los artículos, publicados en español, son sometidos a un proceso de revisión sobre ciego por pares con la finalidad de ofrecer información original, relevante y de alta calidad que abarca todos los aspectos de la Neurología y la Neurociencia.
×
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