人工智能模型GPT-4和GPT-3.5在运动外科和物理治疗临床决策中的比较评价:一项横断面研究。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Sönmez Saglam, Veysel Uludag, Zekeriya Okan Karaduman, Mehmet Arıcan, Mücahid Osman Yücel, Raşit Emin Dalaslan
{"title":"人工智能模型GPT-4和GPT-3.5在运动外科和物理治疗临床决策中的比较评价:一项横断面研究。","authors":"Sönmez Saglam, Veysel Uludag, Zekeriya Okan Karaduman, Mehmet Arıcan, Mücahid Osman Yücel, Raşit Emin Dalaslan","doi":"10.1186/s12911-025-02996-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare has rapidly expanded, particularly in clinical decision-making. Large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 have shown potential in various medical applications, including diagnostics and treatment planning. However, their efficacy in specialized fields like sports surgery and physiotherapy remains underexplored. This study aims to compare the performance of GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 in clinical decision-making within these domains using a structured assessment approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study included 56 professionals specializing in sports surgery and physiotherapy. Participants evaluated 10 standardized clinical scenarios generated by GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 using a 5-point Likert scale. The scenarios encompassed common musculoskeletal conditions, and assessments focused on diagnostic accuracy, treatment appropriateness, surgical technique detailing, and rehabilitation plan suitability. Data were collected anonymously via Google Forms. Statistical analysis included paired t-tests for direct model comparisons, one-way ANOVA to assess performance across multiple criteria, and Cronbach's alpha to evaluate inter-rater reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPT-4 significantly outperformed GPT-3.5 across all evaluated criteria. Paired t-test results (t(55) = 10.45, p < 0.001) demonstrated that GPT-4 provided more accurate diagnoses, superior treatment plans, and more detailed surgical recommendations. ANOVA results confirmed the higher suitability of GPT-4 in treatment planning (F(1, 55) = 35.22, p < 0.001) and rehabilitation protocols (F(1, 55) = 32.10, p < 0.001). Cronbach's alpha values indicated higher internal consistency for GPT-4 (α = 0.478) compared to GPT-3.5 (α = 0.234), reflecting more reliable performance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>GPT-4 demonstrates superior performance compared to GPT-3.5 in clinical decision-making for sports surgery and physiotherapy. These findings suggest that advanced AI models can aid in diagnostic accuracy, treatment planning, and rehabilitation strategies. However, AI should function as a decision-support tool rather than a substitute for expert clinical judgment. Future studies should explore the integration of AI into real-world clinical workflows, validate findings using larger datasets, and compare additional AI models beyond the GPT series.</p>","PeriodicalId":9340,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","volume":"25 1","pages":"163"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11998439/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of artificial intelligence models GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 in clinical decision-making in sports surgery and physiotherapy: a cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Sönmez Saglam, Veysel Uludag, Zekeriya Okan Karaduman, Mehmet Arıcan, Mücahid Osman Yücel, Raşit Emin Dalaslan\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12911-025-02996-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare has rapidly expanded, particularly in clinical decision-making. Large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 have shown potential in various medical applications, including diagnostics and treatment planning. However, their efficacy in specialized fields like sports surgery and physiotherapy remains underexplored. This study aims to compare the performance of GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 in clinical decision-making within these domains using a structured assessment approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study included 56 professionals specializing in sports surgery and physiotherapy. Participants evaluated 10 standardized clinical scenarios generated by GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 using a 5-point Likert scale. The scenarios encompassed common musculoskeletal conditions, and assessments focused on diagnostic accuracy, treatment appropriateness, surgical technique detailing, and rehabilitation plan suitability. Data were collected anonymously via Google Forms. Statistical analysis included paired t-tests for direct model comparisons, one-way ANOVA to assess performance across multiple criteria, and Cronbach's alpha to evaluate inter-rater reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPT-4 significantly outperformed GPT-3.5 across all evaluated criteria. Paired t-test results (t(55) = 10.45, p < 0.001) demonstrated that GPT-4 provided more accurate diagnoses, superior treatment plans, and more detailed surgical recommendations. ANOVA results confirmed the higher suitability of GPT-4 in treatment planning (F(1, 55) = 35.22, p < 0.001) and rehabilitation protocols (F(1, 55) = 32.10, p < 0.001). Cronbach's alpha values indicated higher internal consistency for GPT-4 (α = 0.478) compared to GPT-3.5 (α = 0.234), reflecting more reliable performance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>GPT-4 demonstrates superior performance compared to GPT-3.5 in clinical decision-making for sports surgery and physiotherapy. These findings suggest that advanced AI models can aid in diagnostic accuracy, treatment planning, and rehabilitation strategies. However, AI should function as a decision-support tool rather than a substitute for expert clinical judgment. Future studies should explore the integration of AI into real-world clinical workflows, validate findings using larger datasets, and compare additional AI models beyond the GPT series.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9340,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"163\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11998439/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-025-02996-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL INFORMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-025-02996-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人工智能(AI)在医疗保健领域的整合已经迅速扩大,特别是在临床决策方面。大型语言模型(llm),如GPT-4和GPT-3.5,已经在各种医学应用中显示出潜力,包括诊断和治疗计划。然而,它们在运动外科和物理治疗等专业领域的功效仍未得到充分探索。本研究旨在使用结构化评估方法比较GPT-4和GPT-3.5在这些领域的临床决策中的表现。方法:横断面研究包括56名运动外科和物理治疗专业人员。参与者使用5分Likert量表评估GPT-4和GPT-3.5产生的10个标准化临床场景。这些场景包括常见的肌肉骨骼疾病,评估的重点是诊断的准确性、治疗的适宜性、手术技术的细节和康复计划的适宜性。数据通过谷歌表格匿名收集。统计分析包括配对t检验用于直接模型比较,单因素方差分析用于评估跨多个标准的表现,Cronbach's alpha用于评估评级者之间的信度。结果:GPT-4在所有评估标准上都明显优于GPT-3.5。配对t检验结果(t(55) = 10.45, p)结论:GPT-4在运动手术和物理治疗的临床决策中表现优于GPT-3.5。这些发现表明,先进的人工智能模型可以帮助诊断准确性、治疗计划和康复策略。然而,人工智能应该作为决策支持工具,而不是替代专家的临床判断。未来的研究应该探索将人工智能整合到现实世界的临床工作流程中,使用更大的数据集验证结果,并比较GPT系列之外的其他人工智能模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative evaluation of artificial intelligence models GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 in clinical decision-making in sports surgery and physiotherapy: a cross-sectional study.

Background: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare has rapidly expanded, particularly in clinical decision-making. Large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 have shown potential in various medical applications, including diagnostics and treatment planning. However, their efficacy in specialized fields like sports surgery and physiotherapy remains underexplored. This study aims to compare the performance of GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 in clinical decision-making within these domains using a structured assessment approach.

Methods: This cross-sectional study included 56 professionals specializing in sports surgery and physiotherapy. Participants evaluated 10 standardized clinical scenarios generated by GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 using a 5-point Likert scale. The scenarios encompassed common musculoskeletal conditions, and assessments focused on diagnostic accuracy, treatment appropriateness, surgical technique detailing, and rehabilitation plan suitability. Data were collected anonymously via Google Forms. Statistical analysis included paired t-tests for direct model comparisons, one-way ANOVA to assess performance across multiple criteria, and Cronbach's alpha to evaluate inter-rater reliability.

Results: GPT-4 significantly outperformed GPT-3.5 across all evaluated criteria. Paired t-test results (t(55) = 10.45, p < 0.001) demonstrated that GPT-4 provided more accurate diagnoses, superior treatment plans, and more detailed surgical recommendations. ANOVA results confirmed the higher suitability of GPT-4 in treatment planning (F(1, 55) = 35.22, p < 0.001) and rehabilitation protocols (F(1, 55) = 32.10, p < 0.001). Cronbach's alpha values indicated higher internal consistency for GPT-4 (α = 0.478) compared to GPT-3.5 (α = 0.234), reflecting more reliable performance.

Conclusions: GPT-4 demonstrates superior performance compared to GPT-3.5 in clinical decision-making for sports surgery and physiotherapy. These findings suggest that advanced AI models can aid in diagnostic accuracy, treatment planning, and rehabilitation strategies. However, AI should function as a decision-support tool rather than a substitute for expert clinical judgment. Future studies should explore the integration of AI into real-world clinical workflows, validate findings using larger datasets, and compare additional AI models beyond the GPT series.

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
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
297
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the design, development, implementation, use, and evaluation of health information technologies and decision-making for human health.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信