ChatGPT and post-test probability
0
🎲
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper investigates the ability of the large language model ChatGPT to perform a key task in healthcare: formal, probabilistic medical diagnostic reasoning.
- This type of reasoning is used to update a pre-test probability to a post-test probability, such as the probability of having COVID-19 given a positive test result and symptom.
- The authors probe ChatGPT's performance on this task by asking it to provide examples of how to use Bayes' rule for medical diagnosis.
Plain English Explanation
The paper looks at how well the AI chatbot ChatGPT can do a specific type of medical reasoning. This kind of reasoning is used to figure out the chances of someone having a disease, like COVID-19, after getting a test result and having certain symptoms.
The researchers asked ChatGPT to show examples of using a formula called Bayes' rule to do this kind of medical diagnosis. They compared how ChatGPT did when the questions used general probability terms versus when they used medical terms like "COVID-19" and "cough." The results showed that ChatGPT made more mistakes when the questions used the medical terms.
The researchers also found that they could use certain prompts to help ChatGPT avoid some of these errors. Overall, the paper looks at how well this AI system can handle a key task in healthcare, and how that performance is affected by the way the questions are phrased.
Technical Explanation
The paper investigates the ability of the large language model ChatGPT to perform formal, probabilistic medical diagnostic reasoning. This type of reasoning is used to update a pre-test probability (the likelihood of a disease before a test is performed) to a post-test probability (the likelihood of the disease after a test result is known).
The authors probe ChatGPT's performance on this task by asking it to provide examples of how to use Bayes' rule for medical diagnosis. Their prompts range from using terminology from pure probability (e.g., requests for a posterior of A given B and C) to using terminology from medical diagnosis (e.g., requests for a posterior probability of COVID-19 given a test result and cough).
The results show that the introduction of medical variable names leads to an increase in the number of errors that ChatGPT makes. The authors then demonstrate how prompt engineering can be used to facilitate ChatGPT's partial avoidance of these errors.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides valuable insights into the limitations of large language models like ChatGPT when it comes to performing formal, probabilistic medical diagnostic reasoning. The authors acknowledge that their results may be affected by the specific prompts used, and they encourage further research in this area.
One potential limitation of the study is the small number of prompts used. While the authors demonstrate a clear trend in ChatGPT's performance, a larger and more diverse set of prompts could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the model's capabilities and limitations.
Additionally, the paper does not address the broader implications of these findings for the use of large language models in healthcare. Further research is needed to understand how these models might best be leveraged to support medical professionals, while also addressing concerns about their reliability and transparency.
Conclusion
This paper highlights the challenges that large language models like ChatGPT face when it comes to performing formal, probabilistic medical diagnostic reasoning. The authors show that the introduction of medical terminology can lead to an increase in errors, but that prompt engineering can help mitigate these issues to some degree.
These findings have important implications for the use of large language models in healthcare, where accurate and reliable reasoning is critical. The paper suggests that further research is needed to better understand the strengths and limitations of these models in this domain, and to develop strategies for effectively leveraging their capabilities while addressing their limitations.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🎲
0
ChatGPT and post-test probability
Samuel J. Weisenthal
Reinforcement learning-based large language models, such as ChatGPT, are believed to have potential to aid human experts in many domains, including healthcare. There is, however, little work on ChatGPT's ability to perform a key task in healthcare: formal, probabilistic medical diagnostic reasoning. This type of reasoning is used, for example, to update a pre-test probability to a post-test probability. In this work, we probe ChatGPT's ability to perform this task. In particular, we ask ChatGPT to give examples of how to use Bayes rule for medical diagnosis. Our prompts range from queries that use terminology from pure probability (e.g., requests for a posterior of A given B and C) to queries that use terminology from medical diagnosis (e.g., requests for a posterior probability of Covid given a test result and cough). We show how the introduction of medical variable names leads to an increase in the number of errors that ChatGPT makes. Given our results, we also show how one can use prompt engineering to facilitate ChatGPT's partial avoidance of these errors. We discuss our results in light of recent commentaries on sensitivity and specificity. We also discuss how our results might inform new research directions for large language models.
Read more7/23/2024
🏅
0
Reinforcement of Explainability of ChatGPT Prompts by Embedding Breast Cancer Self-Screening Rules into AI Responses
Yousef Khan, Ahmed Abdeen Hamed
Addressing the global challenge of breast cancer, this research explores the fusion of generative AI, focusing on ChatGPT 3.5 turbo model, and the intricacies of breast cancer risk assessment. The research aims to evaluate ChatGPT's reasoning capabilities, emphasizing its potential to process rules and provide explanations for screening recommendations. The study seeks to bridge the technology gap between intelligent machines and clinicians by demonstrating ChatGPT's unique proficiency in natural language reasoning. The methodology employs a supervised prompt-engineering approach to enforce detailed explanations for ChatGPT's recommendations. Synthetic use cases, generated algorithmically, serve as the testing ground for the encoded rules, evaluating the model's processing prowess. Findings highlight ChatGPT's promising capacity in processing rules comparable to Expert System Shells, with a focus on natural language reasoning. The research introduces the concept of reinforcement explainability, showcasing its potential in elucidating outcomes and facilitating user-friendly interfaces for breast cancer risk assessment.
Read more6/4/2024
🤖
0
How Reliable AI Chatbots are for Disease Prediction from Patient Complaints?
Ayesha Siddika Nipu, K M Sajjadul Islam, Praveen Madiraju
Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbots leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) are gaining traction in healthcare for their potential to automate patient interactions and aid clinical decision-making. This study examines the reliability of AI chatbots, specifically GPT 4.0, Claude 3 Opus, and Gemini Ultra 1.0, in predicting diseases from patient complaints in the emergency department. The methodology includes few-shot learning techniques to evaluate the chatbots' effectiveness in disease prediction. We also fine-tune the transformer-based model BERT and compare its performance with the AI chatbots. Results suggest that GPT 4.0 achieves high accuracy with increased few-shot data, while Gemini Ultra 1.0 performs well with fewer examples, and Claude 3 Opus maintains consistent performance. BERT's performance, however, is lower than all the chatbots, indicating limitations due to limited labeled data. Despite the chatbots' varying accuracy, none of them are sufficiently reliable for critical medical decision-making, underscoring the need for rigorous validation and human oversight. This study reflects that while AI chatbots have potential in healthcare, they should complement, not replace, human expertise to ensure patient safety. Further refinement and research are needed to improve AI-based healthcare applications' reliability for disease prediction.
Read more5/24/2024
0
Effectiveness of ChatGPT in explaining complex medical reports to patients
Mengxuan Sun, Ehud Reiter, Anne E Kiltie, George Ramsay, Lisa Duncan, Peter Murchie, Rosalind Adam
Electronic health records contain detailed information about the medical condition of patients, but they are difficult for patients to understand even if they have access to them. We explore whether ChatGPT (GPT 4) can help explain multidisciplinary team (MDT) reports to colorectal and prostate cancer patients. These reports are written in dense medical language and assume clinical knowledge, so they are a good test of the ability of ChatGPT to explain complex medical reports to patients. We asked clinicians and lay people (not patients) to review explanations and responses of ChatGPT. We also ran three focus groups (including cancer patients, caregivers, computer scientists, and clinicians) to discuss output of ChatGPT. Our studies highlighted issues with inaccurate information, inappropriate language, limited personalization, AI distrust, and challenges integrating large language models (LLMs) into clinical workflow. These issues will need to be resolved before LLMs can be used to explain complex personal medical information to patients.
Read more6/26/2024