Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2305.05609v1

The study titled "The Case Records of ChatGPT: Language Models and Complex Clinical Questions" investigated the accuracy of large language AI models GPT4 and GPT3.5 in diagnosing complex clinical cases using published Case Records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. A total of 50 cases requiring a diagnosis and diagnostic test were identified, and for each case, models were given a prompt requesting the top three specific diagnoses and associated diagnostic tests, followed by case text, labs, and figure legends. The model outputs were assessed in comparison to the final clinical diagnosis and whether the model-predicted test would result in a correct diagnosis. The results showed that both GPT4 and GPT3.5 accurately provided the correct diagnosis in 26% and 22% of cases in one attempt respectively, with an increase to 46% and 42% within three attempts. Similarly, both models provided a correct essential diagnostic test in 28% and 24% of cases in one attempt respectively, with an increase to 44% and 50% within three attempts. No significant differences were found between the two models. While these models demonstrate potential usefulness in generating differential diagnoses, they remain limited in their ability to provide a single unifying diagnosis in complex open-ended cases. Future research should focus on evaluating model performance on larger datasets of open-ended clinical challenges while exploring potential human-AI collaboration strategies to enhance clinical decision-making. Overall, this study highlights the promise of artificial intelligence language models such as GPT4 and GPT3.5 for assisting with clinical decision-making but also emphasizes their limitations when dealing with complex clinical cases that require a single unifying diagnosis.

• - The study investigated the accuracy of GPT4 and GPT3.5 in diagnosing complex clinical cases
• - 50 cases requiring a diagnosis and diagnostic test were identified
• - Models were given a prompt requesting the top three specific diagnoses and associated diagnostic tests, followed by case text, labs, and figure legends
• - Both models accurately provided the correct diagnosis in 26% and 22% of cases in one attempt respectively, with an increase to 46% and 42% within three attempts
• - Both models provided a correct essential diagnostic test in 28% and 24% of cases in one attempt respectively, with an increase to 44% and 50% within three attempts
• - No significant differences were found between the two models
• - These models demonstrate potential usefulness in generating differential diagnoses but remain limited in their ability to provide a single unifying diagnosis in complex open-ended cases.
• - Future research should focus on evaluating model performance on larger datasets of open-ended clinical challenges while exploring potential human-AI collaboration strategies to enhance clinical decision-making.

Summary: Scientists tested two computer programs called GPT4 and GPT3.5 to see if they could diagnose complex medical cases. They looked at 50 cases that needed a diagnosis and tests. The models were given information about the case and asked for the top three possible diagnoses and tests. Both models got the right diagnosis in some cases, but not all of them. They also got better with more attempts. Definitions: - Accuracy: how correct something is - Diagnose: figuring out what is wrong with someone's health - Prompt: a question or request for information - Differential diagnoses: a list of possible conditions that could be causing someone's symptoms - Unifying diagnosis: one main condition that explains all of someone's symptoms - Collaboration strategies: ways for people and computers to work together to solve problems

The Promise of Artificial Intelligence Language Models for Clinical Decision-Making

In recent years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) language models has been gaining traction in various fields, including healthcare. A study titled “The Case Records of ChatGPT: Language Models and Complex Clinical Questions” investigated the accuracy of two large language AI models, GPT4 and GPT3.5, in diagnosing complex clinical cases using published Case Records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. The results showed that both models had potential usefulness in generating differential diagnoses but were limited in their ability to provide a single unifying diagnosis in complex open-ended cases. This study highlights the promise of artificial intelligence language models such as GPT4 and GPT3.5 for assisting with clinical decision-making but also emphasizes their limitations when dealing with complex clinical cases that require a single unifying diagnosis.

Study Design

For this study, 50 cases requiring a diagnosis and diagnostic test were identified from published Case Records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. For each case, models were given a prompt requesting the top three specific diagnoses and associated diagnostic tests followed by case text, labs, and figure legends. The model outputs were assessed against the final clinical diagnosis to determine whether or not they provided an accurate result within one attempt or up to three attempts if needed.

Results

The results showed that both GPT4 and GPT3.5 accurately provided the correct diagnosis in 26% and 22% of cases respectively within one attempt with an increase to 46% and 42% within three attempts. Similarly, both models provided a correct essential diagnostic test in 28% and 24% of cases respectively within one attempt with an increase to 44% and 50% within three attempts; no significant differences between these two models were found during analysis.

Conclusion

Overall, this study demonstrates that AI language models have potential usefulness for assisting clinicians with making decisions regarding complex medical conditions; however they remain limited when it comes to providing a single unifying diagnosis due to their lack of understanding context clues which are often necessary for arriving at an accurate conclusion about patient care plans or treatments options available for them . Future research should focus on evaluating model performance on larger datasets while exploring potential human-AI collaboration strategies to enhance clinical decision-making capabilities even further than what is currently possible today .