Key result
ChatGPT-4 cuts appendicitis grading errors by ~90% versus manual extraction.
Why the study?
Personalizing pediatric appendicitis management via data science is hampered by small datasets and unstructured EMR data.
Does ChatGPT-4 improve the accuracy and efficiency of data extraction from free-text operative and ultrasound reports compared to human collectors in pediatric appendicitis?
Cross-Sectional (n=103)
Does ChatGPT-4 improve the accuracy and efficiency of data extraction from free-text operative and ultrasound reports compared to human collectors in pediatric appendicitis?
Large language models like ChatGPT-4 can extract clinical data from unstructured EMRs significantly faster and more accurately than trained human collectors.
Should not yet replace manual extraction in pediatric appendicitis research; supports further validation of LLMs for EMR data tasks.
PurposeData science approaches personalizing pediatric appendicitis management are hampered by small datasets and unstructured electronic medical records (EMR). Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots based on large language models can structure free-text EMR data. We compare data extraction quality between ChatGPT-4 and human data collectors.MethodsTo train AI models to grade pediatric appendicitis preoperatively, several data collectors extracted detailed preoperative and operative data from 2100 children operated for acute appendicitis. Collectors were trained for the task based on satisfactory Kappa scores. ChatGPT-4 was prompted to structure free text from 103 random anonymized ultrasound and operative records in the dataset using the set variables and coding options, and to estimate appendicitis severity grade from the operative report. A pediatric surgeon then adjudicated all data, identifying errors in each method.ResultsWithin the 44 ultrasound (42.7%) and 32 operative reports (31.1%) discordant in at least one field, 98% of the errors were found in the manual data extraction. The appendicitis grade was erroneously assigned manually in 29 patients (28.2%), and by ChatGPT-4 in 3 (2.9%). Across datasets, the use of the AI chatbot was able to avoid misclassification in 59.2% of the records including both reports and extracted data approximately 40 times faster.ConclusionAI chatbot significantly outperformed manual data extraction in accuracy for ultrasound and operative reports, and correctly assigned the appendicitis grade. While wider validation is required and data safety concerns must be addressed, these AI tools show significant promise in improving the accuracy and efficiency of research data collection.Levels of EvidenceLevel III.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abu-Ashour et al. (2024) conducted a cross-sectional in Pediatric appendicitis (n=103). ChatGPT-4 data extraction vs. Manual data extraction by human collectors was evaluated on Erroneous assignment of appendicitis grade. ChatGPT-4 significantly outperformed manual data extraction in assigning appendicitis grade, with an error rate of 2.9% compared to 28.2% for human collectors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: