{"id":969,"date":"2024-10-02T23:05:57","date_gmt":"2024-10-02T23:05:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/?p=969"},"modified":"2024-10-02T23:05:57","modified_gmt":"2024-10-02T23:05:57","slug":"when-should-we-trust-ai-more-than-physicians","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/?p=969","title":{"rendered":"When should we trust AI more than physicians?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The time may be fast approaching.   A paper by <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC10980135\/\">Goh et al. 2024<\/a> sampled 50 physicians and examined which was better: physicians alone, physicians with access to GPT-4, or GPT-4 alone.  The primary outcome was how well each group diagnosed the case (i.e., diagnostic reasoning score).  The authors found that:<\/p>\n<p> The median diagnostic reasoning score per case was 76.3 percent (IQR 65.8 to 86.8) for the GPT-4 group and 73.7 percent (IQR 63.2 to 84.2) for the conventional resources group, with an adjusted difference of 1.6 percentage points (95% CI \u22124.4 to 7.6; p=0.60). The median time spent on cases for the GPT-4 group was 519 seconds (IQR 371 to 668 seconds), compared to 565 seconds (IQR 456 to 788 seconds) for the conventional resources group, with a time difference of \u221282 seconds (95% CI \u2212195 to 31; p=0.20). GPT-4 alone scored 15.5 percentage points (95% CI 1.5 to 29, p=0.03) higher than the conventional resources group.<br \/>Conclusions and Relevance:<\/p>\n<p>So not only was GPT-4 faster, and better than physicians alone, it was also better than physicians when they had access to GPT-4.  The authors summarize as follows: <\/p>\n<p> <em>In a clinical vignette-based study, the availability of GPT-4 to physicians as a diagnostic aid did not significantly improve clinical reasoning compared to conventional resources, although it may improve components of clinical reasoning such as efficiency. GPT-4 alone demonstrated higher performance than both physician groups, suggesting opportunities for further improvement in physician-AI collaboration in clinical practice. <\/em> <\/p>\n<p>HT: To <a href=\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/posts\/emollick_a-preview-of-the-coming-problem-of-working-activity-7247261073634918403-zcgO?utm_source=share&amp;utm_medium=member_desktop\">Ethan Mollick<\/a>.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The time may be fast approaching. A paper by Goh et al. 2024 sampled 50 physicians and examined which was better: physicians alone, physicians with access to GPT-4, or GPT-4 alone. The primary outcome was how well each group diagnosed the case (i.e., diagnostic reasoning score). The authors found that: The median diagnostic reasoning score&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-969","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/969"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=969"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/969\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=969"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=969"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medical-article.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=969"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}