Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Performance of ChatGPT in Diagnosis of Corneal Eye Diseases.
Delsoz, Mohammad; Madadi, Yeganeh; Raja, Hina; Munir, Wuqaas M; Tamm, Brendan; Mehravaran, Shiva; Soleimani, Mohammad; Djalilian, Ali; Yousefi, Siamak.
Afiliação
  • Delsoz M; Department of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN.
  • Madadi Y; Department of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN.
  • Raja H; Department of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN.
  • Munir WM; Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Tamm B; Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Mehravaran S; Department of Biology, School of Computer, Mathematical, and Natural Sciences, Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD.
  • Soleimani M; Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.
  • Djalilian A; Eye Research Center, Farabi Eye Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran ; and.
  • Yousefi S; Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Cornea ; 43(5): 664-670, 2024 May 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38391243
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

The aim of this study was to assess the capabilities of ChatGPT-4.0 and ChatGPT-3.5 for diagnosing corneal eye diseases based on case reports and compare with human experts.

METHODS:

We randomly selected 20 cases of corneal diseases including corneal infections, dystrophies, and degenerations from a publicly accessible online database from the University of Iowa. We then input the text of each case description into ChatGPT-4.0 and ChatGPT-3.5 and asked for a provisional diagnosis. We finally evaluated the responses based on the correct diagnoses, compared them with the diagnoses made by 3 corneal specialists (human experts), and evaluated interobserver agreements.

RESULTS:

The provisional diagnosis accuracy based on ChatGPT-4.0 was 85% (17 correct of 20 cases), whereas the accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5 was 60% (12 correct cases of 20). The accuracy of 3 corneal specialists compared with ChatGPT-4.0 and ChatGPT-3.5 was 100% (20 cases, P = 0.23, P = 0.0033), 90% (18 cases, P = 0.99, P = 0.6), and 90% (18 cases, P = 0.99, P = 0.6), respectively. The interobserver agreement between ChatGPT-4.0 and ChatGPT-3.5 was 65% (13 cases), whereas the interobserver agreement between ChatGPT-4.0 and 3 corneal specialists was 85% (17 cases), 80% (16 cases), and 75% (15 cases), respectively. However, the interobserver agreement between ChatGPT-3.5 and each of 3 corneal specialists was 60% (12 cases).

CONCLUSIONS:

The accuracy of ChatGPT-4.0 in diagnosing patients with various corneal conditions was markedly improved than ChatGPT-3.5 and promising for potential clinical integration. A balanced approach that combines artificial intelligence-generated insights with clinical expertise holds a key role for unveiling its full potential in eye care.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Inteligência Artificial / Doenças da Córnea Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Inteligência Artificial / Doenças da Córnea Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article