首页|Studies from University of Iowa Hospitals Describe New Findings in Artificial In telligence (Can Artificial Intelligence Support Infection Prevention and Control Consultations?)
Studies from University of Iowa Hospitals Describe New Findings in Artificial In telligence (Can Artificial Intelligence Support Infection Prevention and Control Consultations?)
扫码查看
点击上方二维码区域，可以放大扫码查看
原文链接
NETL
NSTL
By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Robotics & Machine Learning Daily News Daily News – Investigators publish new report on ar tificial intelligence. According to news reporting from the University of Iowa H ospitals by NewsRx journalists, research stated, “Artificial intelligence (AI) t ools have demonstrated success in US medical licensing examinations; however, th eir utility in infection prevention and control (IPC) remains unknown. The progr am of hospital epidemiology handles consultation calls and records each question and answer. Using 2022 data, we selected 31 frequently asked questions.” Our news journalists obtained a quote from the research from University of Iowa Hospitals: “We utilized four AI tools, including Chat GPT-3.5 and 4.0, Bing AI, and OpenEvidence, to generate answers. We predefined scales (Table 1) to capture responses by three reviewers, including two hospital epidemiologists and one in fection preventionist. The mean score of 3 and 4 was considered acceptable in ac curacy and completeness, respectively. We reported the percentage of responses w ith acceptable accuracy and completeness out of assessed questions for each cate gory. Among 31 questions, 16 were associated with isolation duration, 9 with hea lthcare personnel (HCP) exposure, 4 with cleaning contaminated rooms, and 2 with patient exposure. Regarding accuracy, most AI tools performed worse in question s about isolation duration, ranging between 75% and 93.8% . All AI tools, except OpenEvidence, had a 100% accuracy rate for HCP and patient exposure. All AI tools had a 100% accuracy rate fo r contaminated room handling. The highest overall acceptable accuracy rate was o bserved in Chat GPT-3.5. Regarding completeness, most AI tools performed worse i n questions about isolation duration, ranging between 44% and 75% . All AI tools, except OpenEvidence, had a 100% completeness rate for contaminated rooms and patient exposure. The highest overall acceptable comp leteness rate was observed in Bing AI (Table 2).”
University of Iowa HospitalsArtificial IntelligenceEmerging TechnologiesEpidemiologyHospitalsMachine LearningRisk and Prevention
NETL
NSTL
