Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Comparison of the Usability and Reliability of Answers to Clinical Questions: AI-Generated ChatGPT versus a Human-Authored Resource
8
Zitationen
3
Autoren
2024
Jahr
Abstract
The quality of ChatGPT responses to real-world clinical questions varied widely, with nearly one-third or more answers considered inferior to a human-authored source in several aspects of usability and reliability. Caution is advised when using ChatGPT in clinical decision making.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.561 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.452 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.948 Zit.
BioBERT: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining
2019 · 6.797 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.781 Zit.