Scholarlink

<p>While generative artificial intelligence (AI) has shown potential in medical diagnostics, comprehensive evaluation of its diagnostic performance and comparison with physicians has not been extensively explored. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies validating generative AI models for diagnostic tasks published between June 2018 and June 2024. Analysis of 83 studies revealed an overall diagnostic accuracy of 52.1%. No significant performance difference was found between AI models and physicians overall (<i>p</i> = 0.10) or non-expert physicians (<i>p</i> = 0.93). However, AI models performed significantly worse than expert physicians (<i>p</i> = 0.007). Several models demonstrated slightly higher performance compared to non-experts, although the differences were not significant. Generative AI demonstrates promising diagnostic capabilities with accuracy varying by model. Although it has not yet achieved expert-level reliability, these findings suggest potential for enhancing healthcare delivery and medical education when implemented with appropriate understanding of its limitations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance comparison between generative AI and physicians

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月22日

查看全文
  • Hirotaka Takita,
  • Daijiro Kabata,
  • Shannon L. Walston,
  • Hiroyuki Tatekawa,
  • Kenichi Saito,
  • Yasushi Tsujimoto,
  • Yukio Miki,
  • Daiju Ueda

摘要

While generative artificial intelligence (AI) has shown potential in medical diagnostics, comprehensive evaluation of its diagnostic performance and comparison with physicians has not been extensively explored. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies validating generative AI models for diagnostic tasks published between June 2018 and June 2024. Analysis of 83 studies revealed an overall diagnostic accuracy of 52.1%. No significant performance difference was found between AI models and physicians overall (p = 0.10) or non-expert physicians (p = 0.93). However, AI models performed significantly worse than expert physicians (p = 0.007). Several models demonstrated slightly higher performance compared to non-experts, although the differences were not significant. Generative AI demonstrates promising diagnostic capabilities with accuracy varying by model. Although it has not yet achieved expert-level reliability, these findings suggest potential for enhancing healthcare delivery and medical education when implemented with appropriate understanding of its limitations.