PreprintCited by 176Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationMachine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

AI chatbots not yet ready for clinical use

Open access
Yeung, Joshua Au, Kraljevic, Zeljko, Luintel, Akish, Balston, Alfred, Idowu, Esther, Dobson, Richard J, Teo, James T·2023·Frontiers in Digital Health

Preprint — published as 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1161098 · Paper page

Abstract

As large language models (LLMs) expand and become more advanced, so does the natural language processing capabilities of conversational AI, or ‘chatbots’. OpenAI’s recent release, ChatGPT, uses a transformer-based model to enable human-like text generation and question-answering on general domain knowledge, while a healthcare-specific Large Language Model (LLM) such as GatorTron has focused on the real-world healthcare domain knowledge. As LLMs advance to achieve near human-level performances on medical question and answering benchmarks, it is probable that Conversational AI will soon be developed for use in healthcare. In this article we discuss the potential and compare the performance of two different approaches to generative pretrained transformers – ChatGPT, the most widely used general conversational LLM, and Foresight, a GPT (generative pretrained transformer) based model focused on modelling patients and disorders. The comparison is conducted on the task of forecasting relevant diagnoses based on clinical vignettes. We also discuss important considerations and limitations of transformer-based chatbots for clinical use.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2023.03.02.23286705

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 23 · Cited by 176

Authors
Yeung, J. A., Kraljevic, Z., Luintel, A., Balston, A., Idowu, E., Dobson, R. J., & Teo, J. T.
Affiliations
  • St Thomas' Hospital (GB)
  • King's College Hospital (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Yeung, Joshua Au
Venue
Frontiers in Digital Health
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2023-03-05
Volume
5
Pages
1161098-1161098
ISSN
2673-253X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4365148488
Cited by
176
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 61 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 34 · 2013: 1
FWCI
6.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Digital Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (ACF-2021-17-002)
  • King's College London
  • Medical Research Council (HDR-23004, MC_PC_17214)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
large language models, chatbots, clinical decision support, ChatGPT, foresight, generative pre-trained transformer, clinical vignettes, medical question answering

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review