Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Performance of chatGPT-3.5 answering questions from the Brazilian Council of Ophthalmology Board Examination
7
Zitationen
6
Autoren
2023
Jahr
Abstract
Importance: Large language models being approved in medical boarding examinations highlights problems and challenges for healthcare education, improving tests, and deployment of chatbots. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT-3.5 in answering the Brazilian Council of Ophthalmology Board Examination. Material and Methods: Two independent ophthalmologists inputted all questions to ChatGPT-3.5 and evaluated the responses for correctness, adjudicating in disagreements. We compared the performance of the ChatGPT across tests, ophthalmological themes, and mathematical questions. The included test was the 2022 Brazilian Council of Ophthalmology Board Examination which consists of theoretical test I, II, and theoretical–practical. Results: ChatGPT-3.5 answered 68 (41.46%) questions correctly, 88 (53.66%) wrongly, and 8 (4.88%) undetermined. In questions involving mathematical concepts, artificial intelligence correctly answered 23.8% of questions. In theoretical examinations I and II, correctly answered 43.18% and 40.83%, respectively. There was no statistical difference (odds ratio 1.101, 95% confidence interval 0.548–2.215, P = 0.787) comparing correct answers between tests and comparing within the test themes ( P = 0.646) for correct answers. Conclusion and Relevance: Our study shows that ChatGPT would not succeed in the Brazilian ophthalmological board examination, a specialist-level test, and struggle with mathematical questions. Poor performance of ChatGPT can be explained by a lack of adequate clinical data in training and problems in question formulation, with caution recommended in deploying chatbots for ophthalmology.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.292 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.143 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.539 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.452 Zit.