在电子病历中检测过敏反应的人工智能。

IF 2.1 Q3 ALLERGY
Asia Pacific Allergy Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-08 DOI:10.5415/apallergy.0000000000000179
Luis Felipe Ensina, Matheus Matos Machado, Joice B Machado Marques, Monica Pugliese H Dos Santos, Fábio Cerqueira Lario, Chayanne Andrade Araújo, Fabiana Andrade Nunes Oliveira, Dilvan de Abreu Moreira
{"title":"在电子病历中检测过敏反应的人工智能。","authors":"Luis Felipe Ensina, Matheus Matos Machado, Joice B Machado Marques, Monica Pugliese H Dos Santos, Fábio Cerqueira Lario, Chayanne Andrade Araújo, Fabiana Andrade Nunes Oliveira, Dilvan de Abreu Moreira","doi":"10.5415/apallergy.0000000000000179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite established criteria, diagnosing anaphylaxis remains challenging but critical for preventing future reactions. Fast-paced clinical settings, compounded by underrecording in electronic medical records (EMRs), increase the risk of dangerous re-exposures. Leveraging artificial intelligence through automated systems such as large language models (LLMs) offers a solution.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to assess the efficacy of artificial intelligence, specifically LLMs, in autonomously identifying anaphylaxis diagnoses from EMR text to enhance patient safety and optimize care delivery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>LLMs (GPT 3.5, 4, and 4 Turbo) analyzed 969 medical texts in Brazilian Portuguese, annotated as anaphylaxis-positive (48) or negative (921) by 3 expert physicians. A primary prompt simulated a general practitioner's role in reviewing medical narratives for anaphylaxis detection, with a secondary prompt incorporating World Allergy Organization (WAO) criteria. The experiments were conducted using 3 GPT configurations. The diagnostic suggestions of the LLM were compared to the physicians' diagnoses. Precision, sensitivity (recall), specificity, and accuracy values were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using the primary prompt, GPT 4 Turbo detected anaphylaxis cases with 90.6% precision, 100% sensitivity, 99.5% specificity, 99.5% accuracy, and a Cohen kappa coefficient of 0.95. The inclusion of WAO criteria slightly improved the performance of older models (GPT 3.5 + 4 configuration). However, for GPT 4 Turbo, additional information did not enhance precision.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results highlight the potential of artificial intelligence, particularly LLMs, to automate anaphylaxis diagnosis, support healthcare professionals, and improve patient safety and care.</p>","PeriodicalId":8488,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Allergy","volume":"15 3","pages":"153-158"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12419321/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial intelligence for detecting anaphylaxis in electronic medical records.\",\"authors\":\"Luis Felipe Ensina, Matheus Matos Machado, Joice B Machado Marques, Monica Pugliese H Dos Santos, Fábio Cerqueira Lario, Chayanne Andrade Araújo, Fabiana Andrade Nunes Oliveira, Dilvan de Abreu Moreira\",\"doi\":\"10.5415/apallergy.0000000000000179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite established criteria, diagnosing anaphylaxis remains challenging but critical for preventing future reactions. Fast-paced clinical settings, compounded by underrecording in electronic medical records (EMRs), increase the risk of dangerous re-exposures. Leveraging artificial intelligence through automated systems such as large language models (LLMs) offers a solution.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to assess the efficacy of artificial intelligence, specifically LLMs, in autonomously identifying anaphylaxis diagnoses from EMR text to enhance patient safety and optimize care delivery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>LLMs (GPT 3.5, 4, and 4 Turbo) analyzed 969 medical texts in Brazilian Portuguese, annotated as anaphylaxis-positive (48) or negative (921) by 3 expert physicians. A primary prompt simulated a general practitioner's role in reviewing medical narratives for anaphylaxis detection, with a secondary prompt incorporating World Allergy Organization (WAO) criteria. The experiments were conducted using 3 GPT configurations. The diagnostic suggestions of the LLM were compared to the physicians' diagnoses. Precision, sensitivity (recall), specificity, and accuracy values were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using the primary prompt, GPT 4 Turbo detected anaphylaxis cases with 90.6% precision, 100% sensitivity, 99.5% specificity, 99.5% accuracy, and a Cohen kappa coefficient of 0.95. The inclusion of WAO criteria slightly improved the performance of older models (GPT 3.5 + 4 configuration). However, for GPT 4 Turbo, additional information did not enhance precision.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results highlight the potential of artificial intelligence, particularly LLMs, to automate anaphylaxis diagnosis, support healthcare professionals, and improve patient safety and care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8488,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia Pacific Allergy\",\"volume\":\"15 3\",\"pages\":\"153-158\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12419321/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia Pacific Allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5415/apallergy.0000000000000179\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Pacific Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5415/apallergy.0000000000000179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管建立了标准,诊断过敏反应仍然具有挑战性,但对预防未来的反应至关重要。快节奏的临床环境,加上电子病历(emr)记录不足,增加了危险的再次暴露的风险。通过自动化系统(如大型语言模型(llm))利用人工智能提供了一个解决方案。目的:本研究旨在评估人工智能(特别是llm)在从EMR文本自主识别过敏反应诊断方面的功效,以提高患者安全性并优化护理服务。方法:LLMs (GPT 3.5, 4和4 Turbo)分析了969篇巴西葡萄牙语医学文献,由3名专家医生注释为过敏反应阳性(48)或阴性(921)。初级提示模拟全科医生在审查过敏反应检测的医学叙述中的作用,二级提示结合世界过敏组织(WAO)标准。实验采用了3种GPT结构。将LLM的诊断建议与内科医生的诊断进行比较。计算精密度、灵敏度(召回率)、特异度和准确度值。结果:在首次提示下,GPT 4 Turbo对过敏反应的检测准确率为90.6%,灵敏度为100%,特异度为99.5%,准确度为99.5%,科恩卡帕系数为0.95。WAO标准的加入略微提高了旧型号(GPT 3.5 + 4配置)的性能。然而,对于GPT 4 Turbo,额外的信息并没有提高精度。结论:研究结果突出了人工智能,特别是法学硕士在过敏反应自动诊断、支持医疗保健专业人员以及改善患者安全和护理方面的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Artificial intelligence for detecting anaphylaxis in electronic medical records.

Artificial intelligence for detecting anaphylaxis in electronic medical records.

Artificial intelligence for detecting anaphylaxis in electronic medical records.

Artificial intelligence for detecting anaphylaxis in electronic medical records.

Background: Despite established criteria, diagnosing anaphylaxis remains challenging but critical for preventing future reactions. Fast-paced clinical settings, compounded by underrecording in electronic medical records (EMRs), increase the risk of dangerous re-exposures. Leveraging artificial intelligence through automated systems such as large language models (LLMs) offers a solution.

Objective: This study aims to assess the efficacy of artificial intelligence, specifically LLMs, in autonomously identifying anaphylaxis diagnoses from EMR text to enhance patient safety and optimize care delivery.

Methods: LLMs (GPT 3.5, 4, and 4 Turbo) analyzed 969 medical texts in Brazilian Portuguese, annotated as anaphylaxis-positive (48) or negative (921) by 3 expert physicians. A primary prompt simulated a general practitioner's role in reviewing medical narratives for anaphylaxis detection, with a secondary prompt incorporating World Allergy Organization (WAO) criteria. The experiments were conducted using 3 GPT configurations. The diagnostic suggestions of the LLM were compared to the physicians' diagnoses. Precision, sensitivity (recall), specificity, and accuracy values were calculated.

Results: Using the primary prompt, GPT 4 Turbo detected anaphylaxis cases with 90.6% precision, 100% sensitivity, 99.5% specificity, 99.5% accuracy, and a Cohen kappa coefficient of 0.95. The inclusion of WAO criteria slightly improved the performance of older models (GPT 3.5 + 4 configuration). However, for GPT 4 Turbo, additional information did not enhance precision.

Conclusion: The results highlight the potential of artificial intelligence, particularly LLMs, to automate anaphylaxis diagnosis, support healthcare professionals, and improve patient safety and care.

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
2.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Asia Pacific Allergy (AP Allergy) is the official journal of the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology (APAAACI). Although the primary aim of the journal is to promote communication between Asia Pacific scientists who are interested in allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology including immunodeficiency, the journal is intended to be available worldwide. To enable scientists and clinicians from emerging societies appreciate the scope and intent of the journal, early issues will contain more educational review material. For better communication and understanding, it will include rational concepts related to the diagnosis and management of asthma and other immunological conditions. Over time, the journal will increase the number of original research papers to become the foremost citation journal for allergy and clinical immunology information of the Asia Pacific in the future.
×
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