Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39139542›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology science

Interpretation of Clinical Retinal Images Using an Artificial Intelligence Chatbot.

Andrew Mihalache, Ryan S Huang, David Mikhail, Marko M Popovic, Reut Shor, Austin Pereira, Jason Kwok, Peng Yan, David T Wong, Peter J Kertes and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Andrew MihalacheTemerty School of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ryan S HuangTemerty School of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
David MikhailTemerty School of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Marko M PopovicDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Reut ShorDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Austin PereiraDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jason KwokDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Peng YanDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
David T WongDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Peter J KertesDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Radha P KohlyDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Rajeev H MuniDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the performance of Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer-4 in providing accurate diagnoses to retina teaching cases from OCTCases. Design: Cross-sectional study. Subjects: Retina teaching cases from OCTCases. Methods: We prompted a custom chatbot with 69 retina cases containing multimodal ophthalmic images, asking it to provide the most likely diagnosis. In a sensitivity analysis, we inputted increasing amounts of clinical information pertaining to each case until the chatbot achieved a correct diagnosis. We performed multivariable logistic regressions on Stata v17.0 (StataCorp LLC) to investigate associations between the amount of text-based information inputted per prompt and the odds of the chatbot achieving a correct diagnosis, adjusting for the laterality of cases, number of ophthalmic images inputted, and imaging modalities. Main Outcome Measures: Our primary outcome was the proportion of cases for which the chatbot was able to provide a correct diagnosis. Our secondary outcome was the chatbot's performance in relation to the amount of text-based information accompanying ophthalmic images. Results: Across 69 retina cases collectively containing 139 ophthalmic images, the chatbot was able to provide a definitive, correct diagnosis for 35 (50.7%) cases. The chatbot needed variable amounts of clinical information to achieve a correct diagnosis, where the entire patient description as presented by OCTCases was required for a majority of correctly diagnosed cases (23 of 35 cases, 65.7%). Relative to when the chatbot was only prompted with a patient's age and sex, the chatbot achieved a higher odds of a correct diagnosis when prompted with an entire patient description (odds ratio = 10.1, 95% confidence interval = 3.3-30.3, Conclusions: This custom chatbot was able to accurately diagnose approximately half of the retina cases requiring multimodal input, albeit relying heavily on text-based contextual information that accompanied ophthalmic images. The diagnostic ability of the chatbot in interpretation of multimodal imaging without text-based information is currently limited. The appropriate use of the chatbot in this setting is of utmost importance, given bioethical concerns. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceImage processingNatural language processingOCT

Identifiers

PMID39139542
PMCPMC11321281

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.