一步一步的研究人员在流行病学中使用基于人工智能的变压器的指南:使用观察性研究的STROBE检查表对ChatGPT进行探索性分析

Q3 Medicine
F. Sanmarchi, Andrea Bucci, Andrea Giovanni Nuzzolese, G. Carullo, F. Toscano, N. Nante, D. Golinelli
{"title":"一步一步的研究人员在流行病学中使用基于人工智能的变压器的指南:使用观察性研究的STROBE检查表对ChatGPT进行探索性分析","authors":"F. Sanmarchi, Andrea Bucci, Andrea Giovanni Nuzzolese, G. Carullo, F. Toscano, N. Nante, D. Golinelli","doi":"10.1101/2023.02.06.23285514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives. This study aims at investigating how early-stage AI-based transformers can support researchers in designing and conducting an epidemiological study. To accomplish this, we used ChatGPT to reformulate the STROBE recommendations into a list of questions to be answered by the transformer itself. We then qualitatively evaluated the coherence and relevance of the transformers outputs. Study design: Descriptive study. Methods. We first chose a study to be used as a basis for the simulation. We then used ChatGPT to transform each STROBE checklist item into specific prompts. Each answer to the respective prompt was evaluated by independent researchers in terms of coherence and relevance. Results. The mean scores assigned to each prompt were heterogeneous. On average, for the coherence domain, the overall mean score was 3.6 out of 5.0, and for relevance it was 3.3 out of 5.0. The lowest scores were assigned to items belonging to the Methods section of the checklist. Conclusions. ChatGPT can be considered as a valuable support for researchers in conducting an epidemiological study, following internationally recognized guidelines and standards. It is crucial for the users to have knowledge on the subject and a critical mindset when evaluating the outputs. The potential benefits of AI in scientific research and publishing are undeniable, but it is crucial to address the risks, and the ethical and legal consequences associated with its use.","PeriodicalId":23839,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Gesundheitswissenschaften","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A step-by-step researcher's guide to the use of an AI-based transformer in epidemiology: an exploratory analysis of ChatGPT using the STROBE checklist for observational studies\",\"authors\":\"F. Sanmarchi, Andrea Bucci, Andrea Giovanni Nuzzolese, G. Carullo, F. Toscano, N. Nante, D. Golinelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2023.02.06.23285514\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives. This study aims at investigating how early-stage AI-based transformers can support researchers in designing and conducting an epidemiological study. To accomplish this, we used ChatGPT to reformulate the STROBE recommendations into a list of questions to be answered by the transformer itself. We then qualitatively evaluated the coherence and relevance of the transformers outputs. Study design: Descriptive study. Methods. We first chose a study to be used as a basis for the simulation. We then used ChatGPT to transform each STROBE checklist item into specific prompts. Each answer to the respective prompt was evaluated by independent researchers in terms of coherence and relevance. Results. The mean scores assigned to each prompt were heterogeneous. On average, for the coherence domain, the overall mean score was 3.6 out of 5.0, and for relevance it was 3.3 out of 5.0. The lowest scores were assigned to items belonging to the Methods section of the checklist. Conclusions. ChatGPT can be considered as a valuable support for researchers in conducting an epidemiological study, following internationally recognized guidelines and standards. It is crucial for the users to have knowledge on the subject and a critical mindset when evaluating the outputs. The potential benefits of AI in scientific research and publishing are undeniable, but it is crucial to address the risks, and the ethical and legal consequences associated with its use.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zeitschrift Fur Gesundheitswissenschaften\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"23\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zeitschrift Fur Gesundheitswissenschaften\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.06.23285514\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift Fur Gesundheitswissenschaften","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.06.23285514","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

摘要

目标。本研究旨在调查早期基于人工智能的变压器如何支持研究人员设计和开展流行病学研究。为了实现这一点,我们使用ChatGPT将STROBE建议重新表述为由转换器本身回答的问题列表。然后我们定性地评估了变压器输出的相干性和相关性。研究设计:描述性研究。方法。我们首先选择了一项研究作为模拟的基础。然后,我们使用ChatGPT将每个STROBE检查表项转换为特定的提示。每个问题的答案都由独立研究人员根据连贯性和相关性进行评估。结果。分配给每个提示的平均分数是不同的。平均而言,在连贯性领域,总体平均得分为3.6分(满分5.0分),而在相关性领域,平均得分为3.3分(满分5.0分)。最低的分数被分配给属于检查表的方法部分的项目。结论。ChatGPT可被视为研究人员根据国际公认的指导方针和标准进行流行病学研究的宝贵支持。用户在评估产出时,掌握有关主题的知识和批判性思维是至关重要的。人工智能在科学研究和出版方面的潜在好处是不可否认的,但解决其风险以及与使用人工智能相关的伦理和法律后果至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A step-by-step researcher's guide to the use of an AI-based transformer in epidemiology: an exploratory analysis of ChatGPT using the STROBE checklist for observational studies
Objectives. This study aims at investigating how early-stage AI-based transformers can support researchers in designing and conducting an epidemiological study. To accomplish this, we used ChatGPT to reformulate the STROBE recommendations into a list of questions to be answered by the transformer itself. We then qualitatively evaluated the coherence and relevance of the transformers outputs. Study design: Descriptive study. Methods. We first chose a study to be used as a basis for the simulation. We then used ChatGPT to transform each STROBE checklist item into specific prompts. Each answer to the respective prompt was evaluated by independent researchers in terms of coherence and relevance. Results. The mean scores assigned to each prompt were heterogeneous. On average, for the coherence domain, the overall mean score was 3.6 out of 5.0, and for relevance it was 3.3 out of 5.0. The lowest scores were assigned to items belonging to the Methods section of the checklist. Conclusions. ChatGPT can be considered as a valuable support for researchers in conducting an epidemiological study, following internationally recognized guidelines and standards. It is crucial for the users to have knowledge on the subject and a critical mindset when evaluating the outputs. The potential benefits of AI in scientific research and publishing are undeniable, but it is crucial to address the risks, and the ethical and legal consequences associated with its use.
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
Zeitschrift Fur Gesundheitswissenschaften
Zeitschrift Fur Gesundheitswissenschaften Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: Previous Title Zeitschrift für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Previous Print ISSN 0943-1853, Previous Online ISSN 1613-2238. The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice is an interdisciplinary publication for the discussion and debate of international public health issues, with a focus on European affairs. It describes the social and individual factors determining the basic conditions of public health, analyzing causal interrelations, and offering a scientifically sound rationale for personal, social and political measures of intervention. Coverage includes contributions from epidemiology, health economics, environmental health, management, social sciences, ethics, and law. ISSN: 2198-1833 (Print) 1613-2238 (Online)
×
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