从字节到最佳实践:追溯 ChatGPT-3.5 的发展历程以及与《美国国家综合癌症网络® 胰腺腺癌管理指南》(National Comprehensive Cancer Network® Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management)的一致性。

Tamir E Bresler, Shivam Pandya, Ryan Meyer, Zin Htway, Manabu Fujita
{"title":"从字节到最佳实践:追溯 ChatGPT-3.5 的发展历程以及与《美国国家综合癌症网络® 胰腺腺癌管理指南》(National Comprehensive Cancer Network® Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management)的一致性。","authors":"Tamir E Bresler, Shivam Pandya, Ryan Meyer, Zin Htway, Manabu Fujita","doi":"10.1177/00031348241248801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\nArtificial intelligence continues to play an increasingly important role in modern health care. ChatGPT-3.5 (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA) has gained attention for its potential impact in this domain.\n\n\nOBJECTIVE\nTo explore the role of ChatGPT-3.5 in guiding clinical decision-making specifically in the context of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and to assess its growth over a period of time.\n\n\nPARTICIPANTS\nWe reviewed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma and formulated a complex clinical question for each decision-making page. ChatGPT-3.5 was queried in a reproducible fashion. We scored answers on the following Likert scale: 5) Correct; 4) Correct, with missing information requiring clarification; 3) Correct, but unable to complete answer; 2) Partially incorrect; 1) Absolutely incorrect. We repeated this protocol at 3-months. Score frequencies were compared, and subgroup analysis was conducted on Correctness (defined as scores 1-2 vs 3-5) and Accuracy (scores 1-3 vs 4-5).\n\n\nRESULTS\nIn total, 50-pages of the NCCN Guidelines® were analyzed, generating 50 complex clinical questions. On subgroup analysis, the percentage of Acceptable answers improved from 60% to 76%. The score improvement was statistically significant (Mann-Whitney U-test; Mean Rank = 44.52 vs 56.48, P = .027).\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nChatGPT-3.5 represents an interesting but limited tool for assistance in clinical decision-making. We demonstrate that the platform evolved, and its responses to our standardized questions improved over a relatively short period (3-months). Future research is needed to determine the validity of this tool for this clinical application.","PeriodicalId":325363,"journal":{"name":"The American Surgeon","volume":"7 46","pages":"31348241248801"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Bytes to Best Practices: Tracing ChatGPT-3.5's Evolution and Alignment With the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management.\",\"authors\":\"Tamir E Bresler, Shivam Pandya, Ryan Meyer, Zin Htway, Manabu Fujita\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00031348241248801\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"INTRODUCTION\\nArtificial intelligence continues to play an increasingly important role in modern health care. ChatGPT-3.5 (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA) has gained attention for its potential impact in this domain.\\n\\n\\nOBJECTIVE\\nTo explore the role of ChatGPT-3.5 in guiding clinical decision-making specifically in the context of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and to assess its growth over a period of time.\\n\\n\\nPARTICIPANTS\\nWe reviewed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma and formulated a complex clinical question for each decision-making page. ChatGPT-3.5 was queried in a reproducible fashion. We scored answers on the following Likert scale: 5) Correct; 4) Correct, with missing information requiring clarification; 3) Correct, but unable to complete answer; 2) Partially incorrect; 1) Absolutely incorrect. We repeated this protocol at 3-months. Score frequencies were compared, and subgroup analysis was conducted on Correctness (defined as scores 1-2 vs 3-5) and Accuracy (scores 1-3 vs 4-5).\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nIn total, 50-pages of the NCCN Guidelines® were analyzed, generating 50 complex clinical questions. On subgroup analysis, the percentage of Acceptable answers improved from 60% to 76%. The score improvement was statistically significant (Mann-Whitney U-test; Mean Rank = 44.52 vs 56.48, P = .027).\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSION\\nChatGPT-3.5 represents an interesting but limited tool for assistance in clinical decision-making. We demonstrate that the platform evolved, and its responses to our standardized questions improved over a relatively short period (3-months). Future research is needed to determine the validity of this tool for this clinical application.\",\"PeriodicalId\":325363,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American Surgeon\",\"volume\":\"7 46\",\"pages\":\"31348241248801\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American Surgeon\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348241248801\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348241248801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言人工智能在现代医疗保健领域发挥着越来越重要的作用。目标探索 ChatGPT-3.5 在指导临床决策(尤其是胰腺腺癌)方面的作用,并评估其在一段时间内的增长情况。参与者我们查阅了美国国立综合癌症网络®(NCCN)的《胰腺腺癌管理临床实践指南》,并为每个决策页面制定了一个复杂的临床问题。我们以可重复的方式查询了 ChatGPT-3.5。我们按以下李克特量表对答案进行评分:5)正确;4)正确,但缺少需要澄清的信息;3)正确,但无法完整回答;2)部分错误;1)完全错误。我们在 3 个月后重复了这一方案。我们比较了得分频率,并对正确率(定义为 1-2 分与 3-5 分)和准确率(1-3 分与 4-5 分)进行了亚组分析。结果共分析了 50 页 NCCN Guidelines®,产生了 50 个复杂的临床问题。通过分组分析,可接受答案的百分比从 60% 提高到 76%。得分的提高具有统计学意义(Mann-Whitney U 检验;平均排名 = 44.52 vs 56.48,P = .027)。结论ChatGPT-3.5 是一个有趣但有限的临床决策辅助工具。我们证明,该平台在相对较短的时间内(3 个月)得到了发展,对标准化问题的回答也有所改进。未来的研究需要确定该工具在临床应用中的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
From Bytes to Best Practices: Tracing ChatGPT-3.5's Evolution and Alignment With the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management.
INTRODUCTION Artificial intelligence continues to play an increasingly important role in modern health care. ChatGPT-3.5 (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA) has gained attention for its potential impact in this domain. OBJECTIVE To explore the role of ChatGPT-3.5 in guiding clinical decision-making specifically in the context of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and to assess its growth over a period of time. PARTICIPANTS We reviewed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma and formulated a complex clinical question for each decision-making page. ChatGPT-3.5 was queried in a reproducible fashion. We scored answers on the following Likert scale: 5) Correct; 4) Correct, with missing information requiring clarification; 3) Correct, but unable to complete answer; 2) Partially incorrect; 1) Absolutely incorrect. We repeated this protocol at 3-months. Score frequencies were compared, and subgroup analysis was conducted on Correctness (defined as scores 1-2 vs 3-5) and Accuracy (scores 1-3 vs 4-5). RESULTS In total, 50-pages of the NCCN Guidelines® were analyzed, generating 50 complex clinical questions. On subgroup analysis, the percentage of Acceptable answers improved from 60% to 76%. The score improvement was statistically significant (Mann-Whitney U-test; Mean Rank = 44.52 vs 56.48, P = .027). CONCLUSION ChatGPT-3.5 represents an interesting but limited tool for assistance in clinical decision-making. We demonstrate that the platform evolved, and its responses to our standardized questions improved over a relatively short period (3-months). Future research is needed to determine the validity of this tool for this clinical application.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Bile Duct Injuries During Urgent Cholecystectomy at a Safety Net Teaching Hospital: Attending Experience and Time of Day May Matter. From Bytes to Best Practices: Tracing ChatGPT-3.5's Evolution and Alignment With the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management. The USCENTCOM Walking Blood Bank Performance Benchmark and Anticipated Benefit of Universal Low Titer Type O Screening. Contemporary Outcomes and Patterns of Injury Associated With Parachuting Accidents. To Drain or Not: Drainage Procedures Remain a Central Tenet of Management of Infected Collections in Acute Pancreatitis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1