Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37087108›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2023

Using AI-generated suggestions from ChatGPT to optimize clinical decision support.

Siru Liu, Aileen P Wright, Barron L Patterson, Jonathan P Wanderer, Robert W Turer, Scott D Nelson, Allison B McCoy, Dean F Sittig, Adam Wright

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 172 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
172citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

172 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Siru LiuDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Aileen P WrightDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Barron L PattersonDepartment of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Jonathan P WandererDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Robert W TurerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1387-640X
Scott D NelsonDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1941-1817
Allison B McCoyDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2292-9147
Dean F SittigSchool of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5811-8915
Adam WrightDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6844-145X

Funding

Safety Promotion through Early Event Detection in the Elderly (SPEEDe)R01AG062499 · NIA · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI WRIGHT, ADAM T · 2019 to 2023
$3.5M
Strategies for Engineering Reliable Value Sets (SERVS)R01LM013995 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI ADAM T WRIGHT · 2022 to 2026
$1.0M
Optimizing Clinical Decision Support Alerts Using Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)K99LM014097 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI LIU, SIRU · 2022 to 2022
$90k
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG062499NLM NIH HHS K99 LM014097NLM NIH HHS R01 LM013995
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine if ChatGPT can generate useful suggestions for improving clinical decision support (CDS) logic and to assess noninferiority compared to human-generated suggestions.

methodsWe supplied summaries of CDS logic to ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) tool for question answering that uses a large language model, and asked it to generate suggestions. We asked human clinician reviewers to review the AI-generated suggestions as well as human-generated suggestions for improving the same CDS alerts, and rate the suggestions for their usefulness, acceptance, relevance, understanding, workflow, bias, inversion, and redundancy.

resultsFive clinicians analyzed 36 AI-generated suggestions and 29 human-generated suggestions for 7 alerts. Of the 20 suggestions that scored highest in the survey, 9 were generated by ChatGPT. The suggestions generated by AI were found to offer unique perspectives and were evaluated as highly understandable and relevant, with moderate usefulness, low acceptance, bias, inversion, redundancy.

conclusionAI-generated suggestions could be an important complementary part of optimizing CDS alerts, can identify potential improvements to alert logic and support their implementation, and may even be able to assist experts in formulating their own suggestions for CDS improvement. ChatGPT shows great potential for using large language models and reinforcement learning from human feedback to improve CDS alert logic and potentially other medical areas involving complex, clinical logic, a key step in the development of an advanced learning health system.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalLearning Health SystemArtificial IntelligenceHumansLanguageWorkflowartificial intelligenceclinical decision supportlarge language model

Identifiers

PMID37087108
PMCPMC10280357

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.