共 1 条
"ChatGPT, Can You Help Me Save My Child's Life?" - Diagnostic Accuracy and Supportive Capabilities to Lay Rescuers by ChatGPT in Prehospital Basic Life Support and Paediatric Advanced Life Support Cases - An In-silico Analysis
被引:6
|作者:
Bushuven, Stefan
[1
,2
,3
]
Bentele, Michael
[1
]
Bentele, Stefanie
[1
]
Gerber, Bianka
[1
]
Bansbach, Joachim
[2
]
Ganter, Julian
[2
]
Trifunovic-Koenig, Milena
[1
]
Ranisch, Robert
[4
]
机构:
[1] Training Ctr Emergency Med NOTIS e V, Breite Str 7, D-78234 Engen, Germany
[2] Univ Freiburg, Dept Anesthesiol & Crit Care, Med Ctr, Fac Med, Freiburg, Germany
[3] Ludwig Maximilians Univ Munchen, Univ Hosp, Inst Med Educ, Munich, Germany
[4] Univ Potsdam, Fac Hlth Sci Brandenburg, Potsdam, Germany
关键词:
Large language model;
ChatGPT;
GPT-4;
Artificial intelligence;
Medical didactics;
Tele-medicine;
First responder;
TELEPHONE TRIAGE;
HEALTH;
SAFETY;
CARE;
D O I:
10.1007/s10916-023-02019-x
中图分类号:
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号:
摘要:
BackgroundPaediatric emergencies are challenging for healthcare workers, first aiders, and parents waiting for emergency medical services to arrive. With the expected rise of virtual assistants, people will likely seek help from such digital AI tools, especially in regions lacking emergency medical services. Large Language Models like ChatGPT proved effective in providing health-related information and are competent in medical exams but are questioned regarding patient safety. Currently, there is no information on ChatGPT's performance in supporting parents in paediatric emergencies requiring help from emergency medical services. This study aimed to test 20 paediatric and two basic life support case vignettes for ChatGPT and GPT-4 performance and safety in children.MethodsWe provided the cases three times each to two models, ChatGPT and GPT-4, and assessed the diagnostic accuracy, emergency call advice, and the validity of advice given to parents.ResultsBoth models recognized the emergency in the cases, except for septic shock and pulmonary embolism, and identified the correct diagnosis in 94%. However, ChatGPT/GPT-4 reliably advised to call emergency services only in 12 of 22 cases (54%), gave correct first aid instructions in 9 cases (45%) and incorrectly advised advanced life support techniques to parents in 3 of 22 cases (13.6%).ConclusionConsidering these results of the recent ChatGPT versions, the validity, reliability and thus safety of ChatGPT/GPT-4 as an emergency support tool is questionable. However, whether humans would perform better in the same situation is uncertain. Moreover, other studies have shown that human emergency call operators are also inaccurate, partly with worse performance than ChatGPT/GPT-4 in our study. However, one of the main limitations of the study is that we used prototypical cases, and the management may differ from urban to rural areas and between different countries, indicating the need for further evaluation of the context sensitivity and adaptability of the model. Nevertheless, ChatGPT and the new versions under development may be promising tools for assisting lay first responders, operators, and professionals in diagnosing a paediatric emergency.Trial registrationNot applicable.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文