Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Assessing GPT‐4's accuracy in answering clinical pharmacological questions on pain therapy
4
Zitationen
6
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and completeness of GPT-4, a large language model, in answering clinical pharmacological questions related to pain therapy, with a focus on its potential as a tool for delivering patient-facing medical information. The objective was to assess its reliability in delivering medical information in the context of pain management. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted with healthcare professionals, including physicians and pharmacists. Participants submitted up to 8 clinical pharmacology questions on pain management, focusing on drug interactions, dosages and contraindications. GPT-4's responses were evaluated based on comprehensibility, detail, satisfaction, medical-pharmacological accuracy and completeness. Additionally, responses were compared to the German Drug Directory to assess their accuracy. RESULTS: The majority of participants (99%) found GPT-4's responses comprehensible, while 84% considered the information detailed enough. Overall satisfaction was high, with 93% expressing satisfaction, and 96% deemed the responses medically accurate. However, only 63% rated the information as complete, with some identifying gaps in pharmacokinetics and drug interaction data. Usability was evaluated as good to excellent, with a System Usability Scale score of 83.38 (± 10.26). CONCLUSION: GPT-4 demonstrates potential as a tool for delivering medical information, particularly in pain management. However, limitations such as incomplete pharmacological data and the potential for contextual carryover in follow-up questions suggest that further refinement is necessary. Developing specialized artificial intelligence tools that integrate real-time pharmacological databases could improve accuracy and reliability for clinical decision-making.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale
2001 · 5.607 Zit.
Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory.
1994 · 5.281 Zit.
CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain—United States, 2016
2016 · 5.144 Zit.
The revised International Association for the Study of Pain definition of pain: concepts, challenges, and compromises
2020 · 4.659 Zit.
The short-form McGill pain questionnaire
1987 · 4.348 Zit.