ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Neurological history both twinned and queried by generative artificial intelligence.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: We propose the use of GPT-4 to facilitate initial history-taking in neurology and other medical specialties. A large language model (LLM) could be utilized as a digital twin which could enhance queryable electronic medical record (EMR) systems and provide healthcare conversational agents (HCAs) to replace waiting-room questionnaires. Methods: In this observational pilot study, we presented verbatim history of present illness (HPI) narratives from published case reports of headache, stroke, and neurodegenerative diseases. Three standard GPT-4 models were designated Models Results: The study achieved an overall HPI content retrieval accuracy of 81%, with accuracies of 84% for headache, 82% for stroke, and 77% for neurodegenerative diseases. Retrieval accuracies for individual HPI components were as follows: 93% for chief complaints, 47% for associated symptoms and review of systems, 76% for relevant symptom details, and 94% for histories of past medical, surgical, allergies, social, and family factors. The ranking of case diagnoses in the differential diagnosis list averaged in the 89th percentile. Discussion: Our tripartite LLM model demonstrated accuracy in extracting essential information from published case reports. Further validation with EMR HPIs, and then with direct patient care will be needed to move toward adaptation of enhanced diagnostic digital twins that incorporate real-time data from health-monitoring devices and self-monitoring assessments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.