Abstract
Objective The effect of temperature settings on the quality of ChatGPT version 3.5 (OpenAI) responses related to drug information remains unclear. We investigated ChatGPT-3.5’s response quality on apixaban information with and without the temperature being set to 0.
Methods On 6 September 2023, 37 questions regarding apixaban, derived from the frequently asked questions on the Bristol–Myers Squibb’s website, were entered into ChatGPT in Japanese. The primary endpoint was the effect of temperature settings on ChatGPT-3.5’s responses to apixaban-related questions. The response accuracy, clarity, detail, and adequacy were rated on a 5-point Likert scale by 10 pharmacists, with higher scores indicating higher response quality. Cumulative score means were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test. In the subgroup analysis, evaluators were limited to pharmacists at university hospitals. Welch’s t-test was employed in sensitivity analysis to validate primary endpoint findings.
Results The mean scores for ChatGPT-3.5’s apixaban-related responses with (13.08) and without (14.40) the temperature being set to 0 were not significantly different (p = 0.064). Accuracy differed significantly (3.15 vs. 3.54, p = 0.045), whereas clarity, detail, and appropriateness were similar. Subgroup analysis (13.30 vs. 14.21, p = 0.394) and sensitivity analysis confirmed similar results (13.45 vs. 14.52, p = 0.105).
Conclusions ChatGPT-3.5 temperature setting does not significantly affect overall responses to apixaban-related inquiries. However, the variance in accuracy suggests that ChatGPT-3.5 is unable to consistently provide precise responses. Hence, it is more suitable as a supplementary tool rather than a primary medical resource.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Institutional Review Board for Observation and Epidemiological Study at the Doujin hospital
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the Mendeley repository, https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/dw2993xm2n/1
