MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL (10/28/2024) — Published in JAMA Network Open, a collaborative team of researchers from the University of Minnesota Medical School, Stanford University, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and the University of Virginia studied how well doctors used GPT-4 — an artificial intelligence (AI) large language model system — for diagnosing patients.
The study was conducted with 50 U.S.-licensed physicians in family medicine, internal medicine and emergency medicine. The research team found that the availability of GPT-4 to physicians as a diagnostic aid did not significantly improve clinical reasoning compared to conventional resources. Other key findings include:
- GPT-4 alone demonstrated significantly better scores in diagnostic performance, surpassing the performance of clinicians using conventional diagnostic online resources and clinicians assisted by GPT-4.
- There was no significant enhancement in diagnostic performance with the addition of GPT-4 when assessing clinicians using GPT-4 against clinicians using conventional diagnostic resources.
“The field of AI is expanding rapidly and impacting our lives inside and outside of medicine. It is important that we study these tools and understand how we best use them to improve the care we provide as well as the experience of providing it,” said Andrew Olson, MD, a professor at the U of M Medical School and hospitalist with M Health Fairview. “This study suggests that there are opportunities for further improvement in physician-AI collaboration in clinical practice.”
These results underline the complexity of integrating AI into clinical practice. While GPT-4 alone showed promising results, the integration of GPT-4 as a diagnostic aid alongside clinicians did not significantly outperform the use of conventional diagnostic resources. This suggests a nuanced potential for AI in healthcare, emphasizing the importance of further exploration into how AI can best support clinical practice. Further, more studies are needed to understand how clinicians should be trained to use these tools.
The four collaborating institutions have launched a bi-coastal AI evaluation network — known as ARiSE — to further evaluate GenAI outputs in healthcare.
Funding for this research was provided by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.
###
About the University of Minnesota Medical School
The University of Minnesota Medical School is at the forefront of learning and discovery, transforming medical care and educating the next generation of physicians. Our graduates and faculty produce high-impact biomedical research and advance the practice of medicine. We acknowledge that the U of M Medical School is located on traditional, ancestral and contemporary lands of the Dakota and the Ojibwe, and scores of other Indigenous people, and we affirm our commitment to tribal communities and their sovereignty as we seek to improve and strengthen our relations with tribal nations. For more information about the U of M Medical School, please visit med.umn.edu.
Journal
JAMA Network Open
Method of Research
Randomized controlled/clinical trial
Subject of Research
People
Article Title
Large Language Model Influence on Diagnostic Reasoning
Article Publication Date
28-Oct-2024
COI Statement
Dr Kanjee reported book royalties from and paid membership on the Wolters Kluwer advisory board for medical education products, and personal fees from Oakstone Publishing for continuing medical education lectures on evidence-based medicine outside the submitted work. Dr Parsons reported receiving grants from the American Medical Association and the Southern Group on Educational Affairs outside the submitted work. Dr Yang reported being an employee of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation during the conduct of the study. Dr Milstein reported receiving personal fees for advisory board membership from the Peterson Center of Healthcare; holding stock options in Emsana Health, Amino Health, FNF Advisors, JRSL LLC, Embold, EZPT/Somatic Health, and Prealize outside the submitted work; and membership on the Leapfrog Group Board Intermountain Healthcare Board. Dr Olson reported receiving grants from 3M and the Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research outside the submitted work. Dr Chen reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health Nation Institute on (NIH) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIH National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network, and the American Heart Association; nonfinancial support from Reaction Explorer LLC; personal fees from multiple legal offices as a medicolegal expert witness; grants from Google Inc and Stanford University; and personal fees from ISHI Health Consulting outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.