Cargando…
Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument
BACKGROUND: ChatGPT-4 is the latest release of a novel artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot able to answer freely formulated and complex questions. In the near future, ChatGPT could become the new standard for health care professionals and patients to access medical information. However, little is k...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
JMIR Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10365578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37389908 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/47479 |
_version_ | 1785077022191517696 |
---|---|
author | Walker, Harriet Louise Ghani, Shahi Kuemmerli, Christoph Nebiker, Christian Andreas Müller, Beat Peter Raptis, Dimitri Aristotle Staubli, Sebastian Manuel |
author_facet | Walker, Harriet Louise Ghani, Shahi Kuemmerli, Christoph Nebiker, Christian Andreas Müller, Beat Peter Raptis, Dimitri Aristotle Staubli, Sebastian Manuel |
author_sort | Walker, Harriet Louise |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: ChatGPT-4 is the latest release of a novel artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot able to answer freely formulated and complex questions. In the near future, ChatGPT could become the new standard for health care professionals and patients to access medical information. However, little is known about the quality of medical information provided by the AI. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the reliability of medical information provided by ChatGPT. METHODS: Medical information provided by ChatGPT-4 on the 5 hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) conditions with the highest global disease burden was measured with the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool. The EQIP tool is used to measure the quality of internet-available information and consists of 36 items that are divided into 3 subsections. In addition, 5 guideline recommendations per analyzed condition were rephrased as questions and input to ChatGPT, and agreement between the guidelines and the AI answer was measured by 2 authors independently. All queries were repeated 3 times to measure the internal consistency of ChatGPT. RESULTS: Five conditions were identified (gallstone disease, pancreatitis, liver cirrhosis, pancreatic cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma). The median EQIP score across all conditions was 16 (IQR 14.5-18) for the total of 36 items. Divided by subsection, median scores for content, identification, and structure data were 10 (IQR 9.5-12.5), 1 (IQR 1-1), and 4 (IQR 4-5), respectively. Agreement between guideline recommendations and answers provided by ChatGPT was 60% (15/25). Interrater agreement as measured by the Fleiss κ was 0.78 (P<.001), indicating substantial agreement. Internal consistency of the answers provided by ChatGPT was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT provides medical information of comparable quality to available static internet information. Although currently of limited quality, large language models could become the future standard for patients and health care professionals to gather medical information. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10365578 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | JMIR Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103655782023-07-25 Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument Walker, Harriet Louise Ghani, Shahi Kuemmerli, Christoph Nebiker, Christian Andreas Müller, Beat Peter Raptis, Dimitri Aristotle Staubli, Sebastian Manuel J Med Internet Res Original Paper BACKGROUND: ChatGPT-4 is the latest release of a novel artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot able to answer freely formulated and complex questions. In the near future, ChatGPT could become the new standard for health care professionals and patients to access medical information. However, little is known about the quality of medical information provided by the AI. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the reliability of medical information provided by ChatGPT. METHODS: Medical information provided by ChatGPT-4 on the 5 hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) conditions with the highest global disease burden was measured with the Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP) tool. The EQIP tool is used to measure the quality of internet-available information and consists of 36 items that are divided into 3 subsections. In addition, 5 guideline recommendations per analyzed condition were rephrased as questions and input to ChatGPT, and agreement between the guidelines and the AI answer was measured by 2 authors independently. All queries were repeated 3 times to measure the internal consistency of ChatGPT. RESULTS: Five conditions were identified (gallstone disease, pancreatitis, liver cirrhosis, pancreatic cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma). The median EQIP score across all conditions was 16 (IQR 14.5-18) for the total of 36 items. Divided by subsection, median scores for content, identification, and structure data were 10 (IQR 9.5-12.5), 1 (IQR 1-1), and 4 (IQR 4-5), respectively. Agreement between guideline recommendations and answers provided by ChatGPT was 60% (15/25). Interrater agreement as measured by the Fleiss κ was 0.78 (P<.001), indicating substantial agreement. Internal consistency of the answers provided by ChatGPT was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT provides medical information of comparable quality to available static internet information. Although currently of limited quality, large language models could become the future standard for patients and health care professionals to gather medical information. JMIR Publications 2023-06-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10365578/ /pubmed/37389908 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/47479 Text en ©Harriet Louise Walker, Shahi Ghani, Christoph Kuemmerli, Christian Andreas Nebiker, Beat Peter Müller, Dimitri Aristotle Raptis, Sebastian Manuel Staubli. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 30.06.2023. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Walker, Harriet Louise Ghani, Shahi Kuemmerli, Christoph Nebiker, Christian Andreas Müller, Beat Peter Raptis, Dimitri Aristotle Staubli, Sebastian Manuel Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument |
title | Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument |
title_full | Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument |
title_fullStr | Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument |
title_full_unstemmed | Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument |
title_short | Reliability of Medical Information Provided by ChatGPT: Assessment Against Clinical Guidelines and Patient Information Quality Instrument |
title_sort | reliability of medical information provided by chatgpt: assessment against clinical guidelines and patient information quality instrument |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10365578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37389908 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/47479 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT walkerharrietlouise reliabilityofmedicalinformationprovidedbychatgptassessmentagainstclinicalguidelinesandpatientinformationqualityinstrument AT ghanishahi reliabilityofmedicalinformationprovidedbychatgptassessmentagainstclinicalguidelinesandpatientinformationqualityinstrument AT kuemmerlichristoph reliabilityofmedicalinformationprovidedbychatgptassessmentagainstclinicalguidelinesandpatientinformationqualityinstrument AT nebikerchristianandreas reliabilityofmedicalinformationprovidedbychatgptassessmentagainstclinicalguidelinesandpatientinformationqualityinstrument AT mullerbeatpeter reliabilityofmedicalinformationprovidedbychatgptassessmentagainstclinicalguidelinesandpatientinformationqualityinstrument AT raptisdimitriaristotle reliabilityofmedicalinformationprovidedbychatgptassessmentagainstclinicalguidelinesandpatientinformationqualityinstrument AT staublisebastianmanuel reliabilityofmedicalinformationprovidedbychatgptassessmentagainstclinicalguidelinesandpatientinformationqualityinstrument |