ChatGPT 在回答心力衰竭相关问题时的适用性。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Heart, Lung and Circulation Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.hlc.2024.03.005
{"title":"ChatGPT 在回答心力衰竭相关问题时的适用性。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.hlc.2024.03.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Heart failure requires complex management, and increased patient knowledge has been shown to improve outcomes. This study assessed the knowledge of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) and its appropriateness as a supplemental resource of information for patients with heart failure.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A total of 107 frequently asked heart failure-related questions were included in 3 categories: “basic knowledge” (49), “management” (41) and “other” (17). Two responses per question were generated using both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (i.e., two responses per question per model). The accuracy and reproducibility of responses were graded by two reviewers, board-certified in cardiology, with differences resolved by a third reviewer, board-certified in cardiology and advanced heart failure. Accuracy was graded using a four-point scale: (1) comprehensive, (2) correct but inadequate, (3) some correct and some incorrect, and (4) completely incorrect.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>GPT-4 provided 107/107 (100%) responses with correct information. Further, GPT-4 displayed a greater proportion of comprehensive knowledge for the categories of “basic knowledge” and “management” (89.8% and 82.9%, respectively). For GPT-3, there were two total responses (1.9%) graded as “some correct and incorrect” for GPT-3.5, while no “completely incorrect” responses were produced. With respect to comprehensive knowledge, GPT-3.5 performed best in the “management” category and “other” category (prognosis, procedures, and support) (78.1%, 94.1%). The models also provided highly reproducible responses, with GPT-3.5 scoring above 94% in every category and GPT-4 with 100% for all answers.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 answered the majority of heart failure-related questions accurately and reliably. If validated in future studies, ChatGPT may serve as a useful tool in the future by providing accessible health-related information and education to patients living with heart failure. In its current state, ChatGPT necessitates further rigorous testing and validation to ensure patient safety and equity across all patient demographics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":13000,"journal":{"name":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","volume":"33 9","pages":"Pages 1314-1318"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1443950624001653/pdfft?md5=19c34317ccf8cf7b45fd251e734d1e0c&pid=1-s2.0-S1443950624001653-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Appropriateness of ChatGPT in Answering Heart Failure Related Questions\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hlc.2024.03.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Heart failure requires complex management, and increased patient knowledge has been shown to improve outcomes. This study assessed the knowledge of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) and its appropriateness as a supplemental resource of information for patients with heart failure.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A total of 107 frequently asked heart failure-related questions were included in 3 categories: “basic knowledge” (49), “management” (41) and “other” (17). Two responses per question were generated using both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (i.e., two responses per question per model). The accuracy and reproducibility of responses were graded by two reviewers, board-certified in cardiology, with differences resolved by a third reviewer, board-certified in cardiology and advanced heart failure. Accuracy was graded using a four-point scale: (1) comprehensive, (2) correct but inadequate, (3) some correct and some incorrect, and (4) completely incorrect.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>GPT-4 provided 107/107 (100%) responses with correct information. Further, GPT-4 displayed a greater proportion of comprehensive knowledge for the categories of “basic knowledge” and “management” (89.8% and 82.9%, respectively). For GPT-3, there were two total responses (1.9%) graded as “some correct and incorrect” for GPT-3.5, while no “completely incorrect” responses were produced. With respect to comprehensive knowledge, GPT-3.5 performed best in the “management” category and “other” category (prognosis, procedures, and support) (78.1%, 94.1%). The models also provided highly reproducible responses, with GPT-3.5 scoring above 94% in every category and GPT-4 with 100% for all answers.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 answered the majority of heart failure-related questions accurately and reliably. If validated in future studies, ChatGPT may serve as a useful tool in the future by providing accessible health-related information and education to patients living with heart failure. In its current state, ChatGPT necessitates further rigorous testing and validation to ensure patient safety and equity across all patient demographics.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart, Lung and Circulation\",\"volume\":\"33 9\",\"pages\":\"Pages 1314-1318\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1443950624001653/pdfft?md5=19c34317ccf8cf7b45fd251e734d1e0c&pid=1-s2.0-S1443950624001653-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart, Lung and Circulation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1443950624001653\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1443950624001653","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:心力衰竭需要复杂的管理,而增加患者知识已被证明可以改善预后。本研究评估了聊天生成预训练转换器(ChatGPT)的知识及其作为心衰患者补充信息资源的适当性:共有 107 个与心力衰竭相关的常见问题被分为 3 类:"基础知识"(49 个)、"管理"(41 个)和 "其他"(17 个)。每个问题使用 GPT-3.5 和 GPT-4 生成两个回答(即每个模型每个问题有两个回答)。回答的准确性和可重复性由两名获得心脏病学专业认证的评审员进行评分,不同意见由第三名获得心脏病学和高级心力衰竭专业认证的评审员解决。准确性采用四级评分法:(1) 全面,(2) 正确但不充分,(3) 部分正确,部分不正确,(4) 完全不正确:结果:GPT-4 提供了 107/107 个(100%)具有正确信息的回答。此外,GPT-4 在 "基础知识 "和 "管理 "类别中显示出更大比例的全面知识(分别为 89.8% 和 82.9%)。就 GPT-3 而言,在 GPT-3.5 中,共有两份答卷(1.9%)被评为 "部分正确,部分不正确",但没有 "完全不正确 "的答卷。在综合知识方面,GPT-3.5 在 "管理 "类别和 "其他 "类别(预后、程序和支持)中表现最佳(78.1%、94.1%)。这些模型还提供了具有高度可重复性的答案,GPT-3.5 在每个类别中的得分都高于 94%,而 GPT-4 在所有答案中的得分均为 100%:结论:GPT-3.5 和 GPT-4 能准确可靠地回答大多数心衰相关问题。如果在未来的研究中得到验证,ChatGPT 将成为一种有用的工具,为心衰患者提供便捷的健康相关信息和教育。就目前的状况而言,ChatGPT 还需要进一步的严格测试和验证,以确保患者的安全和在所有患者人口统计学中的公平性。
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
Appropriateness of ChatGPT in Answering Heart Failure Related Questions

Background

Heart failure requires complex management, and increased patient knowledge has been shown to improve outcomes. This study assessed the knowledge of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) and its appropriateness as a supplemental resource of information for patients with heart failure.

Method

A total of 107 frequently asked heart failure-related questions were included in 3 categories: “basic knowledge” (49), “management” (41) and “other” (17). Two responses per question were generated using both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (i.e., two responses per question per model). The accuracy and reproducibility of responses were graded by two reviewers, board-certified in cardiology, with differences resolved by a third reviewer, board-certified in cardiology and advanced heart failure. Accuracy was graded using a four-point scale: (1) comprehensive, (2) correct but inadequate, (3) some correct and some incorrect, and (4) completely incorrect.

Results

GPT-4 provided 107/107 (100%) responses with correct information. Further, GPT-4 displayed a greater proportion of comprehensive knowledge for the categories of “basic knowledge” and “management” (89.8% and 82.9%, respectively). For GPT-3, there were two total responses (1.9%) graded as “some correct and incorrect” for GPT-3.5, while no “completely incorrect” responses were produced. With respect to comprehensive knowledge, GPT-3.5 performed best in the “management” category and “other” category (prognosis, procedures, and support) (78.1%, 94.1%). The models also provided highly reproducible responses, with GPT-3.5 scoring above 94% in every category and GPT-4 with 100% for all answers.

Conclusions

GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 answered the majority of heart failure-related questions accurately and reliably. If validated in future studies, ChatGPT may serve as a useful tool in the future by providing accessible health-related information and education to patients living with heart failure. In its current state, ChatGPT necessitates further rigorous testing and validation to ensure patient safety and equity across all patient demographics.

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
Heart, Lung and Circulation
Heart, Lung and Circulation CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.80%
发文量
912
审稿时长
11.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Heart, Lung and Circulation publishes articles integrating clinical and research activities in the fields of basic cardiovascular science, clinical cardiology and cardiac surgery, with a focus on emerging issues in cardiovascular disease. The journal promotes multidisciplinary dialogue between cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, cardio-pulmonary physicians and cardiovascular scientists.
期刊最新文献
Qualitative Content Analysis of Unplanned Readmissions in Patients With Acute Heart Failure. Radiofrequency and Cryoablation as Energy Sources in the Cox-Maze Procedure: A Meta-Analysis of Rhythm Outcomes. High-Intensity Interval Training in Adults With Congenital Heart Disease: A Systematic Review. Validation of a Prediction Model From Quantitative Coronary Angiography to Detect Ischaemic Lesions as Evaluated by Invasive Fractional Flow Reserve. The State of STEMI Care Across NSW: A Comparison of Rural, Regional, and Metropolitan Centres.
×
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