How Reliable AI Chatbots are for Disease Prediction from Patient Complaints?

TL;DR

This study evaluates the reliability of AI chatbots like GPT 4.0, Claude 3 Opus, and Gemini Ultra 1.0 in predicting diseases from patient complaints, highlighting their potential and current limitations in healthcare decision-making.

Contribution

It provides a comparative analysis of multiple AI chatbots' performance in disease prediction, emphasizing the need for validation and human oversight in medical applications.

Findings

GPT 4.0 achieves high accuracy with more data

Gemini Ultra 1.0 performs well with fewer examples

BERT's performance is lower than chatbots

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbots leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) are gaining traction in healthcare for their potential to automate patient interactions and aid clinical decision-making. This study examines the reliability of AI chatbots, specifically GPT 4.0, Claude 3 Opus, and Gemini Ultra 1.0, in predicting diseases from patient complaints in the emergency department. The methodology includes few-shot learning techniques to evaluate the chatbots' effectiveness in disease prediction. We also fine-tune the transformer-based model BERT and compare its performance with the AI chatbots. Results suggest that GPT 4.0 achieves high accuracy with increased few-shot data, while Gemini Ultra 1.0 performs well with fewer examples, and Claude 3 Opus maintains consistent performance. BERT's performance, however, is lower than all the chatbots, indicating limitations due to limited labeled data. Despite the chatbots' varying accuracy, none of them are sufficiently reliable for critical medical decision-making, underscoring the need for rigorous validation and human oversight. This study reflects that while AI chatbots have potential in healthcare, they should complement, not replace, human expertise to ensure patient safety. Further refinement and research are needed to improve AI-based healthcare applications' reliability for disease prediction.