Cargando…
A vignette-based evaluation of ChatGPT’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts
ChatGPT is a large language model trained on text corpora and reinforced with human supervision. Because ChatGPT can provide human-like responses to complex questions, it could become an easily accessible source of medical advice for patients. However, its ability to answer medical questions appropr...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10587094/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37857839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-45223-y |
_version_ | 1785123283828473856 |
---|---|
author | Nastasi, Anthony J. Courtright, Katherine R. Halpern, Scott D. Weissman, Gary E. |
author_facet | Nastasi, Anthony J. Courtright, Katherine R. Halpern, Scott D. Weissman, Gary E. |
author_sort | Nastasi, Anthony J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | ChatGPT is a large language model trained on text corpora and reinforced with human supervision. Because ChatGPT can provide human-like responses to complex questions, it could become an easily accessible source of medical advice for patients. However, its ability to answer medical questions appropriately and equitably remains unknown. We presented ChatGPT with 96 advice-seeking vignettes that varied across clinical contexts, medical histories, and social characteristics. We analyzed responses for clinical appropriateness by concordance with guidelines, recommendation type, and consideration of social factors. Ninety-three (97%) responses were appropriate and did not explicitly violate clinical guidelines. Recommendations in response to advice-seeking questions were completely absent (N = 34, 35%), general (N = 18, 18%), or specific (N = 44, 46%). 53 (55%) explicitly considered social factors like race or insurance status, which in some cases changed clinical recommendations. ChatGPT consistently provided background information in response to medical questions but did not reliably offer appropriate and personalized medical advice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10587094 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105870942023-10-21 A vignette-based evaluation of ChatGPT’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts Nastasi, Anthony J. Courtright, Katherine R. Halpern, Scott D. Weissman, Gary E. Sci Rep Article ChatGPT is a large language model trained on text corpora and reinforced with human supervision. Because ChatGPT can provide human-like responses to complex questions, it could become an easily accessible source of medical advice for patients. However, its ability to answer medical questions appropriately and equitably remains unknown. We presented ChatGPT with 96 advice-seeking vignettes that varied across clinical contexts, medical histories, and social characteristics. We analyzed responses for clinical appropriateness by concordance with guidelines, recommendation type, and consideration of social factors. Ninety-three (97%) responses were appropriate and did not explicitly violate clinical guidelines. Recommendations in response to advice-seeking questions were completely absent (N = 34, 35%), general (N = 18, 18%), or specific (N = 44, 46%). 53 (55%) explicitly considered social factors like race or insurance status, which in some cases changed clinical recommendations. ChatGPT consistently provided background information in response to medical questions but did not reliably offer appropriate and personalized medical advice. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC10587094/ /pubmed/37857839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-45223-y Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Nastasi, Anthony J. Courtright, Katherine R. Halpern, Scott D. Weissman, Gary E. A vignette-based evaluation of ChatGPT’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts |
title | A vignette-based evaluation of ChatGPT’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts |
title_full | A vignette-based evaluation of ChatGPT’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts |
title_fullStr | A vignette-based evaluation of ChatGPT’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts |
title_full_unstemmed | A vignette-based evaluation of ChatGPT’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts |
title_short | A vignette-based evaluation of ChatGPT’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts |
title_sort | vignette-based evaluation of chatgpt’s ability to provide appropriate and equitable medical advice across care contexts |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10587094/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37857839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-45223-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nastasianthonyj avignettebasedevaluationofchatgptsabilitytoprovideappropriateandequitablemedicaladviceacrosscarecontexts AT courtrightkatheriner avignettebasedevaluationofchatgptsabilitytoprovideappropriateandequitablemedicaladviceacrosscarecontexts AT halpernscottd avignettebasedevaluationofchatgptsabilitytoprovideappropriateandequitablemedicaladviceacrosscarecontexts AT weissmangarye avignettebasedevaluationofchatgptsabilitytoprovideappropriateandequitablemedicaladviceacrosscarecontexts AT nastasianthonyj vignettebasedevaluationofchatgptsabilitytoprovideappropriateandequitablemedicaladviceacrosscarecontexts AT courtrightkatheriner vignettebasedevaluationofchatgptsabilitytoprovideappropriateandequitablemedicaladviceacrosscarecontexts AT halpernscottd vignettebasedevaluationofchatgptsabilitytoprovideappropriateandequitablemedicaladviceacrosscarecontexts AT weissmangarye vignettebasedevaluationofchatgptsabilitytoprovideappropriateandequitablemedicaladviceacrosscarecontexts |