PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Rao, Arya
AU  - Kim, John
AU  - Kamineni, Meghana
AU  - Pang, Michael
AU  - Lie, Winston
AU  - Succi, Marc D.
TI  - Evaluating ChatGPT as an Adjunct for Radiologic Decision-Making
AID  - 10.1101/2023.02.02.23285399
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.02.02.23285399
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/02/07/2023.02.02.23285399.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/02/07/2023.02.02.23285399.full
AB  - BACKGROUND ChatGPT, a popular new large language model (LLM) built by OpenAI, has shown impressive performance in a number of specialized applications. Despite the rising popularity and performance of AI, studies evaluating the use of LLMs for clinical decision support are lacking.PURPOSE To evaluate ChatGPT’s capacity for clinical decision support in radiology via the identification of appropriate imaging services for two important clinical presentations: breast cancer screening and breast pain.MATERIALS AND METHODS We compared ChatGPT’s responses to the American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria for breast pain and breast cancer screening. Our prompt formats included an open-ended (OE) format, where ChatGPT was asked to provide the single most appropriate imaging procedure, and a select all that apply (SATA) format, where ChatGPT was given a list of imaging modalities to assess. Scoring criteria evaluated whether proposed imaging modalities were in accordance with ACR guidelines.RESULTS ChatGPT achieved an average OE score of 1.83 (out of 2) and a SATA average percentage correct of 88.9% for breast cancer screening prompts, and an average OE score of 1.125 (out of 2) and a SATA average percentage correct of 58.3% for breast pain prompts.CONCLUSION Our results demonstrate the feasibility of using ChatGPT for radiologic decision making, with the potential to improve clinical workflow and responsible use of radiology services.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe project described was supported in part by award Number T32GM144273 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences or the National Institutes of Health.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI 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.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript