Back

Exploration of ChatGPT application in diabetes education: a multi-dataset, multi-reviewer study

Ying, Z.; Fan, Y.; Lu, J.; Wang, P.; Zou, L.; Tang, Q.; Chen, Y.; Li, X.; Chen, Y.

2023-09-27 endocrinology
10.1101/2023.09.27.23296144 medRxiv
Show abstract

AimsLarge language models (LLMs), exemplified by ChatGPT have recently emerged as potential solutions to challenges of traditional diabetes education. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and utility of ChatGPT application in diabetes education. MethodsWe conducted a multi-dataset, multi-reviewer study. In the retrospective dataset evaluation, 85 questions covering seven aspects of diabetes education were collected. Three physicians evaluate the ChatGPT responses for reproducibility, relevance, correctness, helpfulness, and safety, while twelve laypersons evaluated the readability, helpfulness, and trustworthiness of the responses. In the real-world dataset evaluation, three individuals with type 2 diabetes (a newly diagnosed patient, a patient with diabetes for 20 years and on oral anti-diabetic medications, and a patient with diabetes for 40 years and on insulin therapy) posed their questions. The helpfulness and trustworthiness of responses from ChatGPT and physicians were assessed. ResultsIn the retrospective dataset evaluation, physicians rated ChatGPT responses for relevance (5.98/6.00), correctness (5.69/6.00), helpfulness (5.75/6.00), and safety (5.95/6.00), while the ratings by laypersons for readability, helpfulness, and trustworthiness were 5.21/6.00, 5.02/6.00, and 4.99/6.00, respectively. In the real-world dataset evaluation, ChatGPT responses received lower ratings compared to physicians responses (helpfulness: 4.18 vs. 4.91, P <0.001; trustworthiness: 4.80 vs. 5.20, P = 0.042). However, when carefully crafted prompts were utilized, the ratings of ChatGPT responses were comparable to those of physicians. ConclusionsThe results show that the application of ChatGPT in addressing typical diabetes education questions is feasible, and carefully crafted prompts are crucial for satisfactory ChatGPT performance in real-world personalized diabetes education. Whats new?O_LIThis is the first study covering evaluations by doctors, laypersons and patients to explore ChatGPT application in diabetes education. This multi-reviewer evaluation approach provided a multidimensional understanding of ChatGPTs capabilities and laid the foundation for subsequent clinical evaluations. C_LIO_LIThis study suggested that the application of ChatGPT in addressing typical diabetes education questions is feasible, and carefully crafted prompts are crucial for satisfactory ChatGPT performance in real-world personalized diabetes education. C_LIO_LIResults of layperson evaluation revealed that human factors could result in disparities of evaluations. Further concern of trust and ethical issues in AI development are necessary. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Bioengineering
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.5%
2
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
3
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
6.8%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 18%
6.4%
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 29%
6.3%
6
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.3%
7
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
8
Expert Systems with Applications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
9
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.6%
10
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.2%
11
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.1%
12
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
13
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
14
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
15
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
16
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.8%
17
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.5%
18
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
19
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
20
BMC Medical Education
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
21
Journal of Pathology Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
22
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
23
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.8%
24
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
25
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.7%
26
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
28
Biomedicines
66 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
29
Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
30
BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
15 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%