Adoption of AI-Powered Chatbots with Large Language Models by Pathologists
Bychkov, A.; Laohawetwanit, T.; Pinto, D. G.
Show abstract
AimsThe study aimed to investigate the adoption and perception of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, particularly those powered by large language models (LLMs), among pathologists worldwide. It explored the extent of their engagement with these technologies, identifying potential impacts on their professional practices. MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted, gathering data from pathologists on their usage and views concerning AI chatbots powered by LLMs. The survey, distributed globally via various digital platforms, included both quantitative and qualitative questions. Statistical analyses were performed to delineate patterns in the adoption and perspectives on these AI tools among the respondents. ResultsOf 215 respondents, 100 (46.5%) reported using LLMs, particularly ChatGPT, for professional purposes, predominantly for information retrieval, proofreading, and academic writing, highlighting a significant time-saving benefit. The adoption varied across demographics, with younger, male pathologists showing higher usage rates. While the technology was mainly utilized for drafting academic materials and programming tasks, users expressed concerns about information accuracy, privacy, and the need for regulatory approval. Despite recognizing occasional inaccuracies, respondents saw potential in advanced AI features, particularly in image analysis and speech-to-text functions. ConclusionsThe survey underscored pathologists cautious yet growing interest in leveraging LLMs to enhance information accessibility, efficiency, and medical education. While the potential benefits are recognized, significant apprehensions about the reliability, ethics, and security associated with these AI tools underscore the need for comprehensive regulation and standardized practices to ensure their responsible use in the medical field.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Protocol For Human Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in Clinical Consultations 95%
- Clinical code sets and the problem of redundancy in code set repositories 93%
- Evaluating user experience with immersive technology in simulation-based education: a modified Delphi study with qualitative analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Critical Appraisal of Predatory Journals in Pathology 91%
- Clinical and laboratory characteristics in outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19 in healthcare professionals in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 87%
- AI portal tract detection and characterisation for a regional analysis of steatosis and inflammation in MASLD, MASH, and AIH 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- A typology of physician input approaches to using AI chatbots for clinical decision-making: a mixed methods study 94%
- Utilization of Generative AI-drafted Responses for Managing Patient-Provider Communication 92%
- Bridging the Literacy Gap for Surgical Consents: An AI-Human Expert Collaborative Approach 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Theory of radiologist interaction with instant messaging decision support tools: a sequential-explanatory study 96%
- Harnessing the Open Access Version of ChatGPT for Enhanced Clinical Opinions 95%
- Ethical review of clinical research with generative AI: Evaluating ChatGPT’s accuracy and reproducibility 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Empowering Personalized Pharmacogenomics with Generative AI Solutions 94%
- What Do Clinicians Edit in Ambient AI-Drafted Clinical Documentation? A Qualitative Content Analysis 94%
- Usability of a Machine-Learning Clinical Order Recommender System Interface for Clinical Decision Support and Physician Workflow 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.