AI chatbots not yet ready for clinical use
Open accessPreprint — 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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Yeung et al. showed that ChatGPT and Foresight NLP exhibit racial bias towards Black patients.
“Based on an experimental study setup, Yeung et al. deliver an insightful example showing that ChatGPT and Foresight NLP exhibit racial bias towards Black patients28.”
From The ethics of ChatGPT in medicine and healthcare: a systematic review on large language models (LLMs) (2024) · cites this paper as [28]
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)
- PMC
- PMC10130576
- 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
- gold
- doi.org
- 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