Comparative analysis of language models in addressing syphilis-related queries.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Syphilis, caused by Treponema pallidum, is a significant global health concern with potentially severe complications if untreated. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models (LLMs), offer opportunities to enhance medical diagnosis and public health education. This study aims to assess LLMs' ability to provide readable, accurate, and comprehensive syphilis information by comparing it with WHO datasheets and validating through specialist evaluation for clinical relevance.
MATERIAL AND
METHODS
Ten AI-based LLMs were evaluated. Ten questions addressing symptoms, transmission, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention were crafted by researchers. Responses from the LLMs were compared to World Health Organization (WHO) syphilis fact sheets, and a panel of specialists assessed the accuracy, clinical relevance, and readability of the AI-generated information.
RESULTS
Among the evaluated LLMs, ChatGPT 4.0 and Claude demonstrated the highest accuracy, scoring 92% and 89% alignment with WHO standards, respectively. Perplexity and Llama3 performed less reliably, with scores between 60-70%, especially in areas like tertiary syphilis and neurosyphilis. Specialists identified common errors, such as outdated treatment protocols and incorrect descriptions of transmission pathways. Expert reviews further revealed that while LLMs provided adequate information on early syphilis symptoms, they struggled with complex clinical nuances. The specialists' evaluation showed that only 60% of the AI-generated content was deemed clinically reliable without further edits, with ChatGPT 4.0 rated highest by experts in terms of readability and clinical accuracy.
CONCLUSIONS
LLMs hold promise for disseminating syphilis information, but human oversight is crucial. AI models need refinement to improve their accuracy, especially in complex medical scenarios.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.