IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v15y2024i1d10.1038_s41467-024-46411-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic analysis of ChatGPT, Google search and Llama 2 for clinical decision support tasks

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Sandmann

    (University of Münster)

  • Sarah Riepenhausen

    (University of Münster)

  • Lucas Plagwitz

    (University of Münster)

  • Julian Varghese

    (University of Münster)

Abstract

It is likely that individuals are turning to Large Language Models (LLMs) to seek health advice, much like searching for diagnoses on Google. We evaluate clinical accuracy of GPT-3·5 and GPT-4 for suggesting initial diagnosis, examination steps and treatment of 110 medical cases across diverse clinical disciplines. Moreover, two model configurations of the Llama 2 open source LLMs are assessed in a sub-study. For benchmarking the diagnostic task, we conduct a naïve Google search for comparison. Overall, GPT-4 performed best with superior performances over GPT-3·5 considering diagnosis and examination and superior performance over Google for diagnosis. Except for treatment, better performance on frequent vs rare diseases is evident for all three approaches. The sub-study indicates slightly lower performances for Llama models. In conclusion, the commercial LLMs show growing potential for medical question answering in two successive major releases. However, some weaknesses underscore the need for robust and regulated AI models in health care. Open source LLMs can be a viable option to address specific needs regarding data privacy and transparency of training.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Sandmann & Sarah Riepenhausen & Lucas Plagwitz & Julian Varghese, 2024. "Systematic analysis of ChatGPT, Google search and Llama 2 for clinical decision support tasks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-8, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:15:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-024-46411-8
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-46411-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-46411-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-024-46411-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Takanobu Hirosawa & Yukinori Harada & Masashi Yokose & Tetsu Sakamoto & Ren Kawamura & Taro Shimizu, 2023. "Diagnostic Accuracy of Differential-Diagnosis Lists Generated by Generative Pretrained Transformer 3 Chatbot for Clinical Vignettes with Common Chief Complaints: A Pilot Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-10, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eiji Yamamura & Fumio Ohtake, 2024. "Views about ChatGPT: Are human decision making and human learning necessary?," Papers 2406.03823, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arpan Kumar Kar & P. S. Varsha & Shivakami Rajan, 2023. "Unravelling the Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) in Industrial Applications: A Review of Scientific and Grey Literature," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 24(4), pages 659-689, December.
    2. Guilherme R. Guimaraes & Ricardo G. Figueiredo & Caroline Santos Silva & Vanessa Arata & Jean Carlos Z. Contreras & Cristiano M. Gomes & Ricardo B. Tiraboschi & José Bessa Junior, 2024. "Diagnosis in Bytes: Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Google and ChatGPT 3.5 as an Educational Support Tool," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(5), pages 1-11, May.
    3. Konstantinos I. Roumeliotis & Nikolaos D. Tselikas, 2023. "ChatGPT and Open-AI Models: A Preliminary Review," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-24, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:15:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-024-46411-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.