MEDICAL ETHICS

医学伦理学
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:医疗知情同意是任何医疗干预之前的道德和法律必要条件。住院患者在处理知情同意书(ICF)时面临功能健康素养(FHL)挑战。ICF和知情同意程序在中国的合法性仍未披露。该研究的目的是调查中国患者在提供医疗同意之前是否有足够的FHL被真正告知。
    方法:在此横截面中,结构化访谈为基础的研究,在汕头大学医学院附属的两家教学医院(1500张病床的综合三级医院和700张病床的癌症医院)的知情同意情况下评估了FHL。跨临床科室收治的27名患者,连同他们的亲戚(n=59),在获得知情同意后被纳入研究。参与者进行了三步评估,包括两个选定的ICF-背授技能,感知理解(感知),和知情知识(认知),每个组件的最大分数为10。用SPSS(22.0版)对数据进行描述性和推断性统计分析,考虑到显著的P值<0.05。
    结果:参与者的中位年龄(IQR和范围)为35.5岁(28-49岁和13-74岁)。大多数参与者只有高中文化程度(24.4%,21/86)或高中以下学历(47.7%,41/86)。FHL评估-回教的中位数得分(IQR),感知,和认知-为4.0(2.5,5.8),8.0(6.8,8.8),和6.5(5.5,8.0)的10,分别。认知得分与回授得分(r=0.359,P=0.002)或感知得分(r=0.437,P<0.001)之间存在中等相关性。多元线性回归分析预测患者和受教育程度较低是FHL不足的独立危险因素(Ps=0.001)。ICF中缺乏以患者为中心的观点,时间限制,不良的临床沟通被认为是阻碍知情同意的障碍.
    结论:这项研究表明个人FHL和受损的组织HL不足,导致中国教学医院知情同意受损。作为一种补救措施,我们建议提高ICFs的质量,并在所有相关临床医生的知情同意方面进行机构授权的以结果为重点的培训,以提高医学伦理学,确保高质量的医疗保健,解决患者价值,缓解潜在的医疗冲突。
    BACKGROUND: Medical informed consent stands as an ethical and legal requisite preceding any medical intervention. Hospitalized patients face functional health literacy (FHL) challenges when dealing with informed consent forms (ICFs). The legitimacy of ICFs and informed consent procedures in China remains substantially undisclosed. The study\'s aim was to investigate if Chinese patients have adequate FHL to be truly informed before providing medical consent.
    METHODS: In this cross-sectional, structured interview-based study, FHL was assessed within the context of the informed consent scenarios in two teaching hospitals (a 1500-bed general tertiary hospital and a 700-bed cancer hospital) affiliated with Shantou University Medical College. Twenty-seven patients admitted across clinical departments, along with their relatives (n = 59), were enrolled in the study after obtaining informed consent. The participants underwent a three-step assessment with two selected ICFs -teach-back skills, perceived understanding (perception), and informed knowledge (cognizance), with each component carrying a maximum score of 10. Data were analyzed with SPSS (version 22.0) for descriptive and inferential statistics, with consideration of significant P values as < 0.05.
    RESULTS: The median age (IQR and range) of participants was 35.5 (28 - 49 and 13 - 74) years. Most participants had only high school education (24.4%, 21/86) or below high school education (47.7%, 41/86). The median score (IQR) of FHL assessments-teach-back, perception, and cognizance-was 4.0 (2.5, 5.8), 8.0 (6.8, 8.8), and 6.5 (5.5, 8.0) out of 10, respectively. A moderate correlation was observed between the scores of cognizance and teach-back (r = 0.359, P = 0.002) or perception (r = 0.437, P < 0.001). Multivariate linear regression analysis predicted being a patient and having lower education levels as independent risk factors of inadequate FHL (Ps = 0.001). Lack of patient-centeredness in ICFs, time constraints, and poor clinical communication were identified as barriers impeding informed consent.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates inadequacy in personal FHL and impaired organizational HL, resulting in compromised informed consent in Chinese teaching hospitals. As a remedy, we propose improving the quality of ICFs and institutionally mandated outcome-focused training on informed consent for all concerned clinicians to enhance medical ethics, ensure quality health care, address patient values, and mitigate potential medical conflicts.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:补充和替代医学(CAM)的医学研究最近有所增加,引发了对CAM道德地位的伦理关注。医学学术期刊负责对手稿进行伦理审查(ER),以保护人类受试者的利益,并在决定发表之前提供伦理结果。然而,没有对CAM期刊中的ER进行系统分析。本研究旨在评估CAM期刊中道德要求和合规性的现状。
    方法:这是一项横断面研究。我们审查了期刊引文报告(2021)(https://jcr)中包含的CAM期刊作者(IFA)的说明。clarivate.com)获取ER的一般信息和要求。我们还浏览了CAM期刊在1月至6月Q1和Q2部分发表的随机对照试验的手稿,2023年,检查道德要求的实际情况。使用描述性统计和Fisher精确检验进行统计分析。
    结果:最终纳入了27种期刊和68份手稿。92.6%(25/27)的IFA包含ER的关键字,表明存在道德考虑。然而,CAM不需要特定的ER(n=0)。我们按地理来源对期刊进行分类,JCR部分,电子JCR年,研究的类型,%OAGold探讨可能影响CAM期刊制定一定伦理审查政策的因素。结果表明,在任何分类的期刊中,某些伦理审查政策均无统计学意义(p>0.05)。研究中包含的所有RCT手稿通常符合已发表期刊的伦理审查要求。
    结论:所有IFAs讨论的ER,但是内容是分散的,注意力不集中,并且没有关于CAM的特定ER要求。尽管手稿基本上符合期刊的要求,在手稿中不可能更接近ER的过程。为了确保这些政策在未来得到充分执行,CAM期刊应要求作者提供更多详细信息,或形成CAM伦理审查所需的项目清单。
    BACKGROUND: Medical research in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has increased recently, raising ethical concerns about the moral status of CAM. Medical academic journals are responsible for conducting ethical review (ER) of manuscripts to protect the interests of human subjects and to make ethical results available before deciding to publish. However, there has been no systematic analysis of the ER in CAM journals. This study is aim to evaluate the current status of ethical requirements and compliance in CAM journals.
    METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study. We reviewed instructions for authors (IFAs) of CAM journals included in the Journal Citation Reports (2021) ( https://jcr.clarivate.com ) for general information and requirements for ER. We also browsed the manuscripts regarding randomized controlled trials published by CAM journals in Q1 and Q2 section from January to June, 2023, to check the actual situation of ethical requirement. Descriptive statistics and Fisher\'s exact test were used for statistical analysis.
    RESULTS: 27 journals and 68 manuscripts were ultimately included. 92.6% (25/27) IFAs included keywords of ER, indicating the presence of ethical considerations. However, no specific ER was required for CAM (n = 0). We categorized journals by Geographic origin, JCR section, Year of electronic JCR, Types of studies, % of OA Gold to explore the factors that could influence CAM journals to have certain ethical review policies. The results showed there was no statistical significance in certain ethical review policy in any classification of journals (p > 0.05). All RCT manuscripts included in the study generally met the requirements of the published journals for ethical review.
    CONCLUSIONS: All IFAs discussed ER, but the content was scattered, unfocused, and there were no specific ER requirements regarding CAM. Although the manuscripts basically met the requirements of the journal, it was not possible to get closer to the process of ER in the manuscript. To ensure full implementation of these policies in the future, CAM journals should require authors to provide more details, or to form a list of items necessary for CAM ethical review.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这篇观点文章首先探讨了在医学教育背景下与未来大语言模型(LLM)应用相关的道德挑战。这些挑战不仅包括与LLM发展相关的伦理问题,比如人工智能(AI)幻觉,信息偏差,隐私和数据风险,以及透明度和可解释性方面的缺陷,但也涉及LLM的应用问题,包括情商的不足,教育不平等,学术诚信问题,以及责任和版权所有权问题。然后,本文分析了现有的与AI相关的法律和道德框架,并强调了它们在医学教育背景下应用LLM的局限性。为了确保LLM以负责任和安全的方式集成,作者建议开发专门为该领域的LLM量身定制的统一道德框架。该框架应基于八项基本原则:质量控制和监督机制;隐私和数据保护;透明度和可解释性;公平和平等待遇;学术诚信和道德规范;问责制和可追溯性;保护和尊重知识产权;以及促进教育研究和创新。作者进一步讨论了实施这些原则可以采取的具体措施,从而为发展一个全面和可行的道德框架奠定了坚实的基础。基于这八个基本原则的这种统一的道德框架可以为LLM在医学教育中的应用提供明确的指导和支持。这种方法可以帮助在技术进步和道德保障之间建立平衡,从而确保医学教育能够在不损害公平原则的情况下进步,正义,或患者安全,建立更公平的,更安全,以及更有效的医学教育环境。
    This viewpoint article first explores the ethical challenges associated with the future application of large language models (LLMs) in the context of medical education. These challenges include not only ethical concerns related to the development of LLMs, such as artificial intelligence (AI) hallucinations, information bias, privacy and data risks, and deficiencies in terms of transparency and interpretability but also issues concerning the application of LLMs, including deficiencies in emotional intelligence, educational inequities, problems with academic integrity, and questions of responsibility and copyright ownership. This paper then analyzes existing AI-related legal and ethical frameworks and highlights their limitations with regard to the application of LLMs in the context of medical education. To ensure that LLMs are integrated in a responsible and safe manner, the authors recommend the development of a unified ethical framework that is specifically tailored for LLMs in this field. This framework should be based on 8 fundamental principles: quality control and supervision mechanisms; privacy and data protection; transparency and interpretability; fairness and equal treatment; academic integrity and moral norms; accountability and traceability; protection and respect for intellectual property; and the promotion of educational research and innovation. The authors further discuss specific measures that can be taken to implement these principles, thereby laying a solid foundation for the development of a comprehensive and actionable ethical framework. Such a unified ethical framework based on these 8 fundamental principles can provide clear guidance and support for the application of LLMs in the context of medical education. This approach can help establish a balance between technological advancement and ethical safeguards, thereby ensuring that medical education can progress without compromising the principles of fairness, justice, or patient safety and establishing a more equitable, safer, and more efficient environment for medical education.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    异种移植的历史始于19世纪。经过几十年的调查,在全球范围内取得了重大突破和临床前里程碑。随着最近将转基因猪的肾脏和心脏移植到人类体内,这些开创性的成就引起了全世界的极大关注,希望异种移植可以缓解甚至解决器官短缺的问题。2022年1月20日,中国器官移植发展基金会召开了“历史,人类异种移植临床试验的现状和未来,“与会专家讨论了促进中国异种移植伦理和可持续发展的方法。作为专题讨论会的产物,达成了正式的共识,概述专家对科学的意见,监管,中国异种移植临床试验的伦理问题。
    The history of xenotransplantation started in the 19th century. After a few decades of investigation, significant breakthroughs and preclinical milestones have been achieved worldwide. With the recent transplantation of genetically modified porcine kidneys and heart into humans, these ground-breaking achievements have attracted great attention worldwide, in the hope that xenotransplantation might alleviate or even solve the problem of organ shortage. On January 20, 2022, the China Organ Transplantation Development Foundation convened a symposium on \"The History, Current Situation and Future of Human Xenotransplantation Clinical Trials,\" where ways to promote the ethical and sustainable development of xenotransplantation in China were discussed among the participating experts. A formal consensus was reached as the product of the symposium, outlining the expert opinions on scientific, regulatory, and ethical issues of clinical trials of xenotransplantation in China.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:近年来,人工智能技术对临床试验的影响一直在稳步增加。它带来了临床试验的效率和成本的显著提高。这次范围审查的目的是系统地绘制,描述和总结人工智能在临床试验的招募和保留过程中的当前应用。此外,检讨旨在找出利弊,以及与人工智能在优化临床试验中的招募和保留方面的应用相关的障碍和促进因素。这篇综述的发现将为临床试验背景下人工智能的未来发展提供见解和建议。
    方法:相关文献的综述将遵循JoannaBriggs研究所提供的范围界定研究的方法学框架。将使用作者制定的搜索策略进行全面的电子搜索。领先的医学和计算机科学数据库,如PubMed,Embase,Scopus,将搜索IEEEXplore和WebofScience核心合集。搜索将包括分析性观察研究,描述性观察研究,实验和准实验研究以所有语言发表,没有任何时间限制,在临床试验的招募和保留过程中使用人工智能工具。审查小组将筛选已确定的研究,并将其导入专门为此审查创建的专用电子图书馆。将使用数据图表表执行数据提取。
    背景:次要数据将在此范围审查中获得;因此,不需要道德批准。最终审查的结果将发表在同行评审的期刊上。预计结果将为未来的人工智能和临床试验研究提供信息。
    BACKGROUND: In recent years, the influence of artificial intelligence technology on clinical trials has been steadily increasing. It has brought about significant improvements in the efficiency and cost reduction of clinical trials. The objective of this scoping review is to systematically map, describe and summarise the current utilisation of artificial intelligence in recruitment and retention process of clinical trials that has been reported in research. Additionally, the review aims to identify benefits and drawbacks, as well as barriers and facilitators associated with the application of artificial intelligence in optimising recruitment and retention in clinical trials. The findings of this review will provide insights and recommendations for future development of artificial intelligence in the context of clinical trials.
    METHODS: The review of relevant literature will follow the methodological framework for scoping studies provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute. A comprehensive electronic search will be conducted using the search strategy developed by the authors. Leading medical and computer science databases such as PubMed, Embase, Scopus, IEEE Xplore and Web of Science Core Collection will be searched. The search will encompass analytical observational studies, descriptive observational studies, experimental and quasi-experimental studies published in all languages, without any time limitations, which use artificial intelligence tools in the recruitment and retention process of clinical trials. The review team will screen the identified studies and import them into a dedicated electronic library specifically created for this review. Data extraction will be performed using a data charting table.
    BACKGROUND: Secondary data will be attained in this scoping review; therefore, no ethical approval is required. The results of the final review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. It is expected that results will inform future artificial intelligence and clinical trials research.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本研究旨在研究在不同专业的医院工作的医疗保健提供者对卵母细胞冷冻保存的态度和潜在的影响因素。
    方法:横断面研究。
    方法:问卷通过Credamo平台在中国医疗保健提供者中分发。
    方法:2022年4月8日至5月8日招募了877名受访者,其中160名因IP和工作地址不一致而被认定为不合格。
    方法:在四种不同的环境下,个体对卵母细胞冷冻保存的态度,使用自行设计的问卷测量医疗保健提供者对卵母细胞冷冻保存的熟悉程度和对卵母细胞冷冻保存的感知风险。
    结果:招募了877名受访者,717人被确定为合格受访者.确定了两类潜在的医疗保健提供者,其特征是在四种不同的环境下对卵母细胞冷冻保存的态度不同。支持和不情愿。熟悉卵母细胞冷冻保存对感知风险有显著的直接影响,熟悉度较好,预测感知风险较低(β=-0.102,p<0.05)。感知风险对参与者对卵母细胞冷冻保存的态度有显著的直接影响,感知风险较高,预示着更不情愿的态度(β=0.165,p<0.001)。
    结论:由于非医疗原因,大多数医疗保健提供者对未婚妇女的卵母细胞冷冻保存持不情愿的态度,这可能与他们对后代健康风险的担忧以及缺乏关于生殖技术的知识有关。
    OBJECTIVE: The present study was designed to examine the attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation among healthcare providers working in hospitals across specialties and potential influencing factors.
    METHODS: A cross-sectional study.
    METHODS: The questionnaire was distributed among Chinese healthcare providers via the Credamo platform.
    METHODS: There were 877 respondents recruited from 8 April to 8 May 2022, among whom 160 were identified as unqualified because of inconsistency between the IP and work addresses.
    METHODS: Individual attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation under four different settings, familiarity with oocyte cryopreservation and perceived risks about oocyte cryopreservation of healthcare providers were measured using a self-designed questionnaire.
    RESULTS: There were 877 respondents recruited, and 717 were identified as qualified respondents. Two latent classes of healthcare providers characterised by different attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation under four different settings were identified, the supportive and reluctant. Familiarity with oocyte cryopreservation had a significant direct effect on perceived risks, with better familiarity predicting lower perceived risks (β=-0.102, p<0.05). Perceived risks showed a significant direct effect on participants\' attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation, with higher perceived risks predicting a more reluctant attitude (β=0.165, p<0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: The majority of healthcare providers held a reluctant attitude towards oocyte cryopreservation of unmarried women for non-medical reasons, which might relate to their worries about the risks to offspring\'s health and lack of knowledge about a reproductive technique.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:来自低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)的学术著作在学术文献中的代表性不足是一个记录在案的问题,部分归因于编辑偏见。这种趋势,普遍存在于各种学科中,在医学伦理学期刊的背景下,研究较少。这项研究旨在研究高影响力医学伦理期刊中编辑委员会成员(EBM)的组成,并评估这些编辑团队中国际多样性的程度。
    方法:本研究纳入了对16种影响较大的医学伦理期刊的分析。有关这些期刊的EBM的信息是根据世界银行的国家收入分类系统地收集和分类的。然后对编辑委员会的组成进行了深入的审查。
    结果:该研究在选定的期刊中确定了669例EBM。89.84%(601)的成员来自高收入国家(HIC),中上收入国家占7.47%(50),中低收入国家占2.69%(18)。没有EBM与低收入国家相关。区域细分表明,北美是最具代表性的地区,占48.88%(327),其次是欧洲和中亚(27.50%,184),东亚和太平洋地区(13.45%,90),拉丁美洲和加勒比地区(4.63%,31),撒哈拉以南非洲(4.19%,28),中东和北非(0.75%,5),和南亚(0.60%,4).总的来说,这些EBM来自46个不同的国家,美国所占比例最大(43.80%,293),其次是英国(13.15%,88),澳大利亚(7.92%,53),德国(6.73%,45),和加拿大(5.08%,34).
    结论:高影响力医学伦理学期刊在EBM中缺乏国际代表性。该领域的大多数编辑都隶属于HIC,导致编辑委员会中LMIC的代表性严重不足。
    The underrepresentation of scholarly works from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in academic literature is a documented concern, attributed partly to editorial biases. This trend, prevalent across various disciplines, has been less explored in the context of medical ethics journals. This study aimed to examine the composition of editorial board members (EBM) in high-impact medical ethics journals and to evaluate the extent of international diversity within these editorial teams.
    This study incorporated an analysis of 16 high-impact medical ethics journals. Information regarding the EBM of these journals was systematically gathered and categorized based on the World Bank\'s country income classifications. An in-depth examination of the editorial board compositions was then conducted.
    The study identified 669 EBM across the selected journals. A predominant 89.84% (601) of these members were from high-income countries (HICs), with upper-middle-income countries contributing 7.47% (50) and lower-middle-income countries 2.69% (18). No EBM were associated with low-income countries. A regional breakdown indicated that North America was the most represented area, accounting for 48.88% (327), followed by Europe & Central Asia (27.50%, 184), East Asia & Pacific (13.45%, 90), Latin America & Caribbean (4.63%, 31), Sub-Saharan Africa (4.19%, 28), Middle East & North Africa (0.75%, 5), and South Asia (0.60%, 4). In total, these EBMs hailed from 46 different countries, with the United States representing the largest proportion (43.80%, 293), followed by the United Kingdom (13.15%, 88), Australia (7.92%, 53), Germany (6.73%, 45), and Canada (5.08%, 34).
    There is a significant lack of international representation within the EBM of high-impact medical ethics journals. The majority of editors in this field are affiliated with HICs, leading to a severe underrepresentation of LMICs within the editorial boards.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在COVID-19大流行期间,关于疫苗民族主义的伦理评估-“我的国家第一”疫苗分配政策,医学和政治伦理之间存在明显的冲突。医学伦理认为这项政策是自私的,导致全球疫苗分配不均。政治伦理,然而,认为这项政策符合国家利益,不应被贴上不道德的标签。这种冲突是各种基于医学伦理的全球疫苗分配计划的根本原因之一,包括COVID-19疫苗全球获取基金,很难实施。只要国际社会仍然由不同的国家组成,疫苗民族主义将很难根除。因此,国际组织,包括世界卫生组织,应该把重点放在普及疫苗上,而不是仅仅根据医学伦理进行分配。国家,特别是低收入国家,必须加强与疫苗相关的能力建设,以便尽早为其公民接种疫苗。否则,当下一次具有全球挑战性的疫情爆发时,他们可能仍处于全球疫苗分配队列的底部。高收入国家应努力扩大疫苗的分销,包括向缺乏疫苗的国家捐赠疫苗,帮助其他国家建立疫苗工厂,共享疫苗生产技术和知识产权,从医学和政治伦理的角度来看,这是正确的选择。
    During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an apparent conflict between medical and political ethics regarding the ethical evaluation of vaccine nationalism - the \"My Country First\" vaccine allocation policy. Medical ethics sees this policy as selfish, leading to an unequal global vaccine allocation. Political ethics, however, argues that this policy is in the national interest and should not be labeled unethical. This conflict is one of the fundamental reasons why various medical ethics-based global vaccine allocation schemes, including the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility, have been difficult to implement. As long as the international community remains composed of different countries, vaccine nationalism will be difficult to eradicate. Therefore, international organizations, including World Health Organization, should focus on universal vaccine access rather than allocation based solely on medical ethics. Countries, especially low-income countries, must strengthen vaccine-related capacity-building to immunize their citizens as early as possible. Otherwise, they may still be at the bottom of the global vaccine allocation queue when the next globally challenging outbreak occurs. High-income countries should work to expand the distribution of vaccines, including donating vaccines to countries that lack them, helping other countries set up vaccine factories, and sharing vaccine production technology and intellectual property, which is the right choice from medical and political ethics perspectives.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:大型语言模型,比如ChatGPT,能够生成语法上完美和类似人类的文本内容,互联网上出现了大量由ChatGPT生成的文本。然而,医学文本,如临床记录和诊断,需要严格的验证,ChatGPT产生的错误医疗内容可能会导致虚假信息,对医疗保健和公众造成重大伤害。
    目的:这项研究是第一个关于医学中负责任的人工智能生成内容的研究。我们专注于分析人类专家撰写的医学文本与ChatGPT生成的医学文本之间的差异,并设计机器学习工作流程,以有效地检测和区分ChatGPT生成的医学文本。
    方法:我们首先构建了一套数据集,其中包含由人类专家编写并由ChatGPT生成的医学文本。我们分析了这两种内容的语言特征,并发现了词汇上的差异,词性,依赖性,情绪,困惑,和其他方面。最后,我们设计并实现了机器学习方法来检测ChatGPT生成的医学文本。本文使用的数据和代码发布在GitHub上。
    结果:人类编写的医学文本更具体,更多样化,通常包含更有用的信息,而ChatGPT生成的医学文本则更注重流畅性和逻辑性,通常表达通用术语,而不是针对问题背景的有效信息。来自基于变压器的模型的双向编码器表示有效地检测了ChatGPT生成的医学文本,F1得分超过95%。
    结论:尽管ChatGPT生成的文本在语法上是完美的,而且类似于人类,生成的医学文本的语言特征与人类专家撰写的不同。所提出的机器学习算法可以有效地检测由ChatGPT生成的医学文本。这项研究提供了一条在医学中可靠和负责任地使用大型语言模型的途径。
    BACKGROUND: Large language models, such as ChatGPT, are capable of generating grammatically perfect and human-like text content, and a large number of ChatGPT-generated texts have appeared on the internet. However, medical texts, such as clinical notes and diagnoses, require rigorous validation, and erroneous medical content generated by ChatGPT could potentially lead to disinformation that poses significant harm to health care and the general public.
    OBJECTIVE: This study is among the first on responsible artificial intelligence-generated content in medicine. We focus on analyzing the differences between medical texts written by human experts and those generated by ChatGPT and designing machine learning workflows to effectively detect and differentiate medical texts generated by ChatGPT.
    METHODS: We first constructed a suite of data sets containing medical texts written by human experts and generated by ChatGPT. We analyzed the linguistic features of these 2 types of content and uncovered differences in vocabulary, parts-of-speech, dependency, sentiment, perplexity, and other aspects. Finally, we designed and implemented machine learning methods to detect medical text generated by ChatGPT. The data and code used in this paper are published on GitHub.
    RESULTS: Medical texts written by humans were more concrete, more diverse, and typically contained more useful information, while medical texts generated by ChatGPT paid more attention to fluency and logic and usually expressed general terminologies rather than effective information specific to the context of the problem. A bidirectional encoder representations from transformers-based model effectively detected medical texts generated by ChatGPT, and the F1 score exceeded 95%.
    CONCLUSIONS: Although text generated by ChatGPT is grammatically perfect and human-like, the linguistic characteristics of generated medical texts were different from those written by human experts. Medical text generated by ChatGPT could be effectively detected by the proposed machine learning algorithms. This study provides a pathway toward trustworthy and accountable use of large language models in medicine.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Letter
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号