Abstract
Background and Objectives Artificial intelligence is increasingly being employed in healthcare, raising concerns about the exacerbation of disparities. This study evaluates ChatGPT and GPT-4’s ability to comprehend and respond to cirrhosis-related questions in English, Korean, Mandarin, and Spanish, addressing language barriers that may impact patient care.
Methods A set of 36 cirrhosis-related questions were translated into Korean, Mandarin, and Spanish and prompted to both ChatGPT and GPT-4 models. Non-English responses were graded by native-speaking hepatologists on accuracy and similarity to English responses. Chi-square tests were used to compare the proportions of grading between ChatGPT and GPT-4.
Results GPT-4 showed a marked improvement in the proportion of comprehensive and correct answers compared to ChatGPT across all four languages (p<0.05). GPT-4 demonstrated enhanced accuracy and avoided erroneous responses evident in ChatGPT’s output. Significant improvement was observed in Mandarin and Korean subgroups, with a smaller quality gap between English and non-English responses in GPT-4 compared to ChatGPT.
Conclusions GPT-4 exhibited significantly higher accuracy in English and non-English cirrhosis-related questions, highlighting its potential for more accurate and reliable language model applications in diverse linguistic contexts. These advancements have important implications for patients with language discordance, contributing to equalizing health literacy on a global scale.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* The 2 authors share co-first authorship
Conflict of Interest Statement: None declared.
Funding/Support: None
Ethics Approval: Since all responses from OpenAI were publicly available, approval from the institutional review board was not sought.
Data Availability
All data produced are available online using ChatGPT
