Abstract
Integrating large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4 into medical ethics is a novel concept, and understanding the effectiveness of these models in aiding ethicists with decision-making can have significant implications for the healthcare sector. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of GPT-4 in responding to complex medical ethical vignettes and to gauge its utility and limitations for aiding medical ethicists. Using a mixed-methods, cross-sectional survey approach, a panel of six ethicists assessed LLM-generated responses to eight ethical vignettes.The main outcomes measured were relevance, reasoning, depth, technical and non-technical clarity, as well as acceptability of GPT-4’s responses. The readability of the responses was also assessed. Of the six metrics evaluating the effectiveness of GPT-4’s responses, the overall mean score was 4.1/5. GPT-4 was rated highest in providing technical (4.7/5) and non-technical clarity (4.4/5), whereas the lowest rated metrics were depth (3.8/5) and acceptability (3.8/5). There was poor-to-moderate inter-rater reliability characterised by an intraclass coefficient of 0.54 (95% CI: 0.30 to 0.71). Based on panellist feedback, GPT-4 was able to identify and articulate key ethical issues but struggled to appreciate the nuanced aspects of ethical dilemmas and misapplied certain moral principles.This study reveals limitations in the ability of GPT-4 to appreciate the depth and nuanced acceptability of real-world ethical dilemmas, particularly those that require a thorough understanding of relational complexities and context-specific values. Ongoing evaluation of LLM capabilities within medical ethics remains paramount, and further refinement is needed before it can be used effectively in clinical settings.
Subject
Health Policy,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health (social science)
Reference29 articles.
1. Language models are few-shot learners;Brown;Adv Neural Inf Process Syst,2020
2. Chatgpt-reshaping medical education and clinical management;Khan;Pak J Med Sci,2023
3. Biswas S . Chatgpt and the future of medical writing. Radiology 2023;307:e223312. doi:10.1148/radiol.223312
4. Conversational AI models for ophthalmic diagnosis: comparison of chatgpt and the Isabel pro differential diagnosis generator;Balas;JFO Open Ophthalmology,2023
5. Hébert PC , Rosen W . Doing right: a practical guide to ethics for medical trainees and physicians. Oxford University Press Don Mills, ON, 2009.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献