Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance comparison between generative AI and physicians
88
Zitationen
8
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
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.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.324 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.189 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.588 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.470 Zit.