Pier Paolo Prontera, Francesca Romana Prusciano, Marco Lattarulo, Arman Tsaturyan, Francesco Addabbo, Carmine Sciorio, Francesco Saverio Grossi
{"title":"ChatGPT人工智能在临床数据分析中的应用：一个比较机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术（RaRP）后标准与融合前列腺活检结果的例子。","authors":"Pier Paolo Prontera, Francesca Romana Prusciano, Marco Lattarulo, Arman Tsaturyan, Francesco Addabbo, Carmine Sciorio, Francesco Saverio Grossi","doi":"10.4081/aiua.2025.13596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare statistical outputs from ChatGPT 4.0 and human experts in both comparative and correlation analyses in the evaluation of multiparametric MRI/ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy plus random biopsy versus standard random biopsy alone, in terms of upstaging.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Authors performed a retrospective evaluation on 101 patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RaRP) between 2021 and 2023. Patients were divided in two groups, according to the type of prostatic biopsy received: combined fusion (MRI/US) targeted and random biopsy versus standard random biopsy. Clinical and histological data were anonymized and analyzed using logistic regression models, ANOVA, and Chi-square tests. Analysis generated by ChatGPT and by an experienced human statistician were compared. The Q-EVAL and Q-EVA tools were used to assess the quality of user-formulated questions and AI-generated answers, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results revealed high concordance between statistical outputs generated by AI and expert human statistician with perfect concordance using Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ = 1.0). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that fusion biopsy was associated with a reduced likelihood of upstaging, a consistent finding across statistical evaluations. Additionally, user interaction assessments indicated high-quality in question formulation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ChatGPT (version 4.0) proved reliable for statistical analysis, showing strong concordance with human statisticians (κ = 1.0) in performing logistic regression, chi-square, and ANOVA tests. The Q-EVAL tool could reduce query errors, though ChatGPT's lack of automatic citations remains a limitation. Fusion biopsy significantly lowered upstaging risk after RaRP. In conclusion, ChatGPT is a valuable assistive tool but further research is required to optimize human-AI collaboration in clinical research.</p>","PeriodicalId":46900,"journal":{"name":"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia","volume":" ","pages":"13596"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ChatGPT artificial intelligence in clinical data analysis: an example comparing standard <i>vs</i> fusion prostate biopsy outcomes after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RaRP).\",\"authors\":\"Pier Paolo Prontera, Francesca Romana Prusciano, Marco Lattarulo, Arman Tsaturyan, Francesco Addabbo, Carmine Sciorio, Francesco Saverio Grossi\",\"doi\":\"10.4081/aiua.2025.13596\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare statistical outputs from ChatGPT 4.0 and human experts in both comparative and correlation analyses in the evaluation of multiparametric MRI/ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy plus random biopsy versus standard random biopsy alone, in terms of upstaging.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Authors performed a retrospective evaluation on 101 patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RaRP) between 2021 and 2023. Patients were divided in two groups, according to the type of prostatic biopsy received: combined fusion (MRI/US) targeted and random biopsy versus standard random biopsy. Clinical and histological data were anonymized and analyzed using logistic regression models, ANOVA, and Chi-square tests. Analysis generated by ChatGPT and by an experienced human statistician were compared. The Q-EVAL and Q-EVA tools were used to assess the quality of user-formulated questions and AI-generated answers, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results revealed high concordance between statistical outputs generated by AI and expert human statistician with perfect concordance using Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ = 1.0). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that fusion biopsy was associated with a reduced likelihood of upstaging, a consistent finding across statistical evaluations. Additionally, user interaction assessments indicated high-quality in question formulation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ChatGPT (version 4.0) proved reliable for statistical analysis, showing strong concordance with human statisticians (κ = 1.0) in performing logistic regression, chi-square, and ANOVA tests. The Q-EVAL tool could reduce query errors, though ChatGPT's lack of automatic citations remains a limitation. Fusion biopsy significantly lowered upstaging risk after RaRP. In conclusion, ChatGPT is a valuable assistive tool but further research is required to optimize human-AI collaboration in clinical research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"13596\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2025.13596\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2025.13596","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
ChatGPT artificial intelligence in clinical data analysis: an example comparing standard vs fusion prostate biopsy outcomes after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RaRP).
Objective: To compare statistical outputs from ChatGPT 4.0 and human experts in both comparative and correlation analyses in the evaluation of multiparametric MRI/ultrasound fusion-targeted biopsy plus random biopsy versus standard random biopsy alone, in terms of upstaging.
Methods: Authors performed a retrospective evaluation on 101 patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RaRP) between 2021 and 2023. Patients were divided in two groups, according to the type of prostatic biopsy received: combined fusion (MRI/US) targeted and random biopsy versus standard random biopsy. Clinical and histological data were anonymized and analyzed using logistic regression models, ANOVA, and Chi-square tests. Analysis generated by ChatGPT and by an experienced human statistician were compared. The Q-EVAL and Q-EVA tools were used to assess the quality of user-formulated questions and AI-generated answers, respectively.
Results: Results revealed high concordance between statistical outputs generated by AI and expert human statistician with perfect concordance using Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ = 1.0). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that fusion biopsy was associated with a reduced likelihood of upstaging, a consistent finding across statistical evaluations. Additionally, user interaction assessments indicated high-quality in question formulation.
Conclusions: ChatGPT (version 4.0) proved reliable for statistical analysis, showing strong concordance with human statisticians (κ = 1.0) in performing logistic regression, chi-square, and ANOVA tests. The Q-EVAL tool could reduce query errors, though ChatGPT's lack of automatic citations remains a limitation. Fusion biopsy significantly lowered upstaging risk after RaRP. In conclusion, ChatGPT is a valuable assistive tool but further research is required to optimize human-AI collaboration in clinical research.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
