Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36834073›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Diagnostic Accuracy of Differential-Diagnosis Lists Generated by Generative Pretrained Transformer 3 Chatbot for Clinical Vignettes with Common Chief Complaints: A Pilot Study.

Takanobu Hirosawa, Yukinori Harada, Masashi Yokose, Tetsu Sakamoto, Ren Kawamura, Taro Shimizu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 159 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
159citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

159 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. The role of information systems in emergency department decision-making-a literature review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Comparison of Intern Doctors and ChatGPT in Emergency Cases Assessment.Journal of clinical practice and research · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

99 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Takanobu HirosawaDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University, Tochigi 321-0293, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3573-8203
Yukinori HaradaDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University, Tochigi 321-0293, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6042-7397
Masashi YokoseDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University, Tochigi 321-0293, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2685-0658
Tetsu SakamotoDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University, Tochigi 321-0293, Japan.
Ren KawamuraDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University, Tochigi 321-0293, Japan.
Taro ShimizuDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University, Tochigi 321-0293, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnostic accuracy of differential diagnoses generated by artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, including the generative pretrained transformer 3 (GPT-3) chatbot (ChatGPT-3) is unknown. This study evaluated the accuracy of differential-diagnosis lists generated by ChatGPT-3 for clinical vignettes with common chief complaints. General internal medicine physicians created clinical cases, correct diagnoses, and five differential diagnoses for ten common chief complaints. The rate of correct diagnosis by ChatGPT-3 within the ten differential-diagnosis lists was 28/30 (93.3%). The rate of correct diagnosis by physicians was still superior to that by ChatGPT-3 within the five differential-diagnosis lists (98.3% vs. 83.3%,

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceGeneral PractitionersDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansPilot ProjectsSoftwareAI chatbotartificial intelligenceclinical decision supportdiagnosisdiagnostic accuracygenerative pretrained transformersnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID36834073
PMCPMC9967747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.