Appraisal of AI-generated dermatology literature reviews

被引:0
|
作者
Passby, Lauren [1 ]
Madhwapathi, Vidya [2 ]
Tso, Simon [3 ]
Wernham, Aaron [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Birmingham NHS Fdn Trust, Solihull, England
[2] Univ Hosp Birmingham NHS Fdn Trust, Birmingham, England
[3] South Warwickshire NHS Fdn Trust, Jephson Dermatol Ctr, Warwick, England
[4] Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust, Walsall, England
关键词
D O I
10.1111/jdv.20237
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools have the potential to revolutionize many facets of medicine and medical sciences research. Numerous AI tools have been developed and are in continuous states of iterative improvement in their functionality. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the performance of three AI tools: The Literature, Microsoft's Copilot and Google's Gemini in performing literature reviews on a range of dermatology topics. Methods: Each tool was asked to write a literature review on five topics. The topics chosen have recently had peer-reviewed systematic reviews published. The outputs of each took were graded on their evidence and analysis, conclusions and references on a 5-point Likert scale by three dermatologists who are working in clinical practice, have completed the UK dermatology postgraduate training examination and are partaking in continued professional development. Results: Across all five topics chosen, the literature reviews written by Gemini scored the highest. The mean score for Gemini for each review was 10.53, significantly higher than the mean scores achieved by The Literature (7.73) and Copilot (7.4) (p < 0.001). Conclusions: This paper shows that AI-generated literature reviews can provide real-time summaries of medical literature across a range of dermatology topics, but limitations to their comprehensiveness and accuracy are apparent.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Appeal and quality assessment for AI-generated images
    Goering, Steve
    Rao, Rakesh Ramachandra Rao
    Merten, Rasmus
    Raake, Alexander
    [J]. 2023 15TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON QUALITY OF MULTIMEDIA EXPERIENCE, QOMEX, 2023, : 115 - 118
  • [42] Human heuristics for AI-generated language are flawed
    Jakesch, Maurice
    Hancock, Jeffrey T.
    Naaman, Mor
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2023, 120 (11)
  • [43] Analysis of Appeal for Realistic AI-Generated Photos
    Goering, Steve
    Rao, Rakesh Rao Ramachandra
    Merten, Rasmus
    Raake, Alexander
    [J]. IEEE ACCESS, 2023, 11 : 38999 - 39012
  • [44] Astronomers explore uses for AI-generated images
    Davide Castelvecchi
    [J]. Nature, 2017, 542 : 16 - 17
  • [45] AI-generated popular culture: A semiotic perspective
    Liu, Shuyi
    Liang, Xiaohui
    [J]. JOURNAL OF POPULAR CULTURE, 2024,
  • [46] Exposing AI-generated videos with motion magnification
    Jianwei Fei
    Zhihua Xia
    Peipeng Yu
    Fengjun Xiao
    [J]. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 2021, 80 : 30789 - 30802
  • [47] The Datafication of Culture: Romanticism and AI-Generated Poetry
    Binder, Jeffrey M.
    [J]. WORDSWORTH CIRCLE, 2022, 53 (03): : 354 - 373
  • [48] Art in the Time of AI: Style and Artistic Intention in AI-generated Images
    Andreescu, Radu-Cristian
    Ratiu, Dan Eugen
    [J]. META-RESEARCH IN HERMENEUTICS PHENOMENOLOGY AND PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY, 2023, 15 (02) : 415 - 451
  • [49] Assessing AI Detectors in Identifying AI-Generated Code: Implications for Education
    Pan, Wei Hung
    Chok, Ming Jie
    Wong, Jonathan Leong Shan
    Shin, Yung Xin
    Poon, Yeong Shian
    Yang, Zhou
    Chong, Chun Yong
    Lo, David
    Lim, Mei Kuan
    [J]. 2024 ACM/IEEE 44TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING: SOFTWARE ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND TRAINING, ICSE-SEET 2024, 2024, : 1 - 11
  • [50] AI models fed AI-generated data quickly spew nonsense
    Gibney, Elizabeth
    [J]. NATURE, 2024, 632 (8023) : 18 - 19