Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Evaluating the Accuracy, Comprehensiveness, and Validity of ChatGPT Compared to Evidence-Based Sources Regarding Common Surgical Conditions: Surgeons’ Perspectives
3
Zitationen
9
Autoren
2024
Jahr
Abstract
= .111).ConclusionSurveyed U.S. board-certified practicing surgeons rated evidence-based sources as significantly more comprehensive and valid compared to ChatGPT across the majority of surveyed surgical conditions. However, there was no significant difference in accuracy between the sources across the majority of surveyed conditions. While ChatGPT may offer potential benefits in surgical practice, further refinement and validation are necessary to enhance its utility and acceptance among surgeons.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.652 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.567 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 8.083 Zit.
BioBERT: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining
2019 · 6.856 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.781 Zit.