ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence, particularly chatbot systems, is becoming an instrumental tool in health care, aiding clinical decision-making and patient engagement. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the performance of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 in addressing complex clinical and ethical dilemmas, and to illustrate their potential role in health care decision-making while comparing seniors' and residents' ratings, and specific question types. METHODS: A total of 4 specialized physicians formulated 176 real-world clinical questions. A total of 8 senior physicians and residents assessed responses from GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on a 1-5 scale across 5 categories: accuracy, relevance, clarity, utility, and comprehensiveness. Evaluations were conducted within internal medicine, emergency medicine, and ethics. Comparisons were made globally, between seniors and residents, and across classifications. RESULTS: Both GPT models received high mean scores (4.4, SD 0.8 for GPT-4 and 4.1, SD 1.0 for GPT-3.5). GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3.5 across all rating dimensions, with seniors consistently rating responses higher than residents for both models. Specifically, seniors rated GPT-4 as more beneficial and complete (mean 4.6 vs 4.0 and 4.6 vs 4.1, respectively; P<.001), and GPT-3.5 similarly (mean 4.1 vs 3.7 and 3.9 vs 3.5, respectively; P<.001). Ethical queries received the highest ratings for both models, with mean scores reflecting consistency across accuracy and completeness criteria. Distinctions among question types were significant, particularly for the GPT-4 mean scores in completeness across emergency, internal, and ethical questions (4.2, SD 1.0; 4.3, SD 0.8; and 4.5, SD 0.7, respectively; P<.001), and for GPT-3.5's accuracy, beneficial, and completeness dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT's potential to assist physicians with medical issues is promising, with prospects to enhance diagnostics, treatments, and ethics. While integration into clinical workflows may be valuable, it must complement, not replace, human expertise. Continued research is essential to ensure safe and effective implementation in clinical environments.
Subject(s)
Clinical Decision-Making , Humans , Artificial IntelligenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are chronic conditions with overlapping pathogenic mechanisms. The genetic predisposition and inflammatory pathways common to both diseases suggest a syndemic relationship. While some evidence points to a connection between the two conditions, other reports do not support this link. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between AS and the subsequent incidence of IBD. To identify potential risk factors and effect modifiers that contribute to this relationship. METHODS: Utilizing the Chronic Disease Registry of Clalit Health Services, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of individuals diagnosed with AS between January 2002 and December 2018. We compared these patients with age- and sex-matched controls, excluding those with a prior diagnosis of IBD. Statistical analyses included chi-square and t-tests for demographic comparisons, and Cox proportional hazards models for evaluating the risk of IBD development, with adjustments for various co-morbidities and demographic factors. RESULTS: The study included 5825 AS patients and 28,356 controls. AS patients demonstrated a significantly higher incidence of IBD with hazard ratios of 6.09 for Crohn's disease and 2.31 for ulcerative colitis, after multivariate adjustment. The overall incidence of IBD in the AS cohort was significantly higher compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: AS patients exhibit a markedly increased risk of developing IBD. These findings advocate for heightened clinical vigilance for IBD symptoms in AS patients and suggest the need for a multidisciplinary approach to patient care. Further research into the shared pathogenic pathways is needed to develop personalized treatment strategies and improve patient management.
