-
Mashup Score: 30A New Milestone for ChatGPT - 5 day(s) ago
GPT-4 rivals doctors in many medical exams – and beats them in psychiatry
Source: www.stevestewartwilliams.comCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 30A New Milestone for ChatGPT - 5 day(s) ago
GPT-4 rivals doctors in many medical exams – and beats them in psychiatry
Source: www.stevestewartwilliams.comCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 1Three ways ChatGPT helps me in my academic writing - 8 day(s) ago
Nature – Generative AI can be a valuable aid in writing, editing and peer review – if you use it responsibly, says Dritjon Gruda.
Source: www.nature.comCategories: General Medicine News, CardiologistsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 13
Cathie Wood’s Ark Investment Management has announced that it holds a stake in Silicon Valley artificial intelligence darling OpenAI.
Source: www.bloomberg.comCategories: General Medicine News, General HCPsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 1
Detecting problematic research articles timely is a vital task. This study explores whether Twitter mentions of retracted articles can signal potential problems with the articles prior to…
Source: arXiv.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 8Methodological insights into ChatGPT’s screening performance in systematic reviews - BMC Medical Research Methodology - 22 day(s) ago
Background The screening process for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in medical research is a labor-intensive and time-consuming task. While machine learning and deep learning have been applied to facilitate this process, these methods often require training data and user annotation. This study aims to assess the efficacy of ChatGPT, a large language model based on the Generative Pretrained Transformers (GPT) architecture, in automating the screening process for systematic reviews in radiology without the need for training data. Methods A prospective simulation study was conducted between May 2nd and 24th, 2023, comparing ChatGPT’s performance in screening abstracts against that of general physicians (GPs). A total of 1198 abstracts across three subfields of radiology were evaluated. Metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), workload saving, and others were employed. Statistical analyses included the Kappa coefficient for inte
Categories: General Medicine News, Hem/OncsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 2ChatGPT shows potential at accurately summarizing medical abstracts, researchers find - 23 day(s) ago
ChatGPT produced high-quality and accurate summaries of medical abstracts but struggled to classify the relevance of abstracts to medical specialties, a study published in the Annals of Family Medicine showed.“Care models emphasizing clinical productivity leave clinicians with scant time to review the academic literature, even within their own specialty,” Joel Hake, MD, an assistant
Source: www.healio.comCategories: General Medicine News, General HCPsTweet
-
Mashup Score: 373
PURPOSE Worldwide clinical knowledge is expanding rapidly, but physicians have sparse time to review scientific literature. Large language models (eg, Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer [ChatGPT]), might help summarize and prioritize research articles to review. However, large language models sometimes “hallucinate” incorrect information. METHODS We evaluated ChatGPT’s ability to summarize 140 peer-reviewed abstracts from 14 journals. Physicians rated the quality, accuracy, and bias of the ChatGPT summaries. We also compared human ratings of relevance to various areas of medicine to ChatGPT relevance ratings. RESULTS ChatGPT produced summaries that were 70% shorter (mean abstract length of 2,438 characters decreased to 739 characters). Summaries were nevertheless rated as high quality (median score 90, interquartile range [IQR] 87.0-92.5; scale 0-100), high accuracy (median 92.5, IQR 89.0-95.0), and low bias (median 0, IQR 0-7.5). Serious inaccuracies and hallucinations were uncomm
Source: www.annfammed.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Expert PicksTweet
-
Mashup Score: 366
PURPOSE Worldwide clinical knowledge is expanding rapidly, but physicians have sparse time to review scientific literature. Large language models (eg, Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer [ChatGPT]), might help summarize and prioritize research articles to review. However, large language models sometimes “hallucinate” incorrect information. METHODS We evaluated ChatGPT’s ability to summarize 140 peer-reviewed abstracts from 14 journals. Physicians rated the quality, accuracy, and bias of the ChatGPT summaries. We also compared human ratings of relevance to various areas of medicine to ChatGPT relevance ratings. RESULTS ChatGPT produced summaries that were 70% shorter (mean abstract length of 2,438 characters decreased to 739 characters). Summaries were nevertheless rated as high quality (median score 90, interquartile range [IQR] 87.0-92.5; scale 0-100), high accuracy (median 92.5, IQR 89.0-95.0), and low bias (median 0, IQR 0-7.5). Serious inaccuracies and hallucinations were uncomm
Source: www.annfammed.orgCategories: General Medicine News, Expert PicksTweet
-
Mashup Score: 19Why ChatGPT’s ‘Memory’ Will Be A Healthcare Gamechanger - 29 day(s) ago
ChatGPT’s expanded memory capabilities will improve clinical outcomes and revolutionize U.S. medicine, writes Robert Pearl, MD. Here are three potential breakthroughs.
Source: www.forbes.comCategories: General Medicine News, General HCPsTweet
A New Milestone for #ChatGPT: GPT-4 rivals doctors in many medical exams and beats them in psychiatry https://t.co/QgRvXfb3QN via @SteveStuWill @SameiHuda @DrK_W1984 @sanilrege @RealJesseLuke