Comparative performance analysis of ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0 and Bard in answering common patient questions on melanoma<show/>

被引：1

作者：

Deliyannis, Eduardo Panaiotis ^{[1
]}

Paul, Navreet ^{[2
]}

Patel, Priya U. ^{[2
]}

Papanikolaou, Marieta ^{[3
]}

机构：

[1] Queen Elizabeth Hosp, Kings Lynn, England

[2] Norfolk & Norwich Univ Hosp, Dermatol Dept, Norwich, England

[3] Kings Coll London, St Johns Inst Dermatol, Sch Basic & Med Biosci, London, England

来源：

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DERMATOLOGY | 2024年 / 49卷 / 07期

关键词：

D O I：

10.1093/ced/llad409

中图分类号：

R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];

学科分类号：

100206 ;

摘要：

This study evaluates the effectiveness of ChatGPT versions 3.5 and 4.0, and Google's Bard in answering patient questions on melanoma. Results show that both versions of ChatGPT outperform Bard, particularly in readability, with no significant difference between the two ChatGPT versions. The study underscores the potential of large language models in healthcare, highlighting the need for professional oversight and further research.

引用

页码：743 / 746

页数：4

共 50 条

[41] Evolving Landscape of Large Language Models: An Evaluation of ChatGPT and Bard in Answering Patient Queries on Colonoscopy
Tariq, Raseen
Malik, Sheza
Khanna, Sahil
GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2024, 166 (01) : 220 - 221
[42] Reply to 'Comment on: Benchmarking the performance of large language models in uveitis: a comparative analysis of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4.0, Google Gemini, and Anthropic Claude3'
Zhao, Fang-Fang
He, Han-Jie
Liang, Jia-Jian
Cen, Ling-Ping
EYE, 2025,
[43] Performance assessment of ChatGPT 4, ChatGPT 3.5, Gemini Advanced Pro 1.5 and Bard 2.0 to problem solving in pathology in French language
Tarris, Georges
Martin, Laurent
DIGITAL HEALTH, 2025, 11
[44] Appropriateness and Readability of ChatGPT-3.5 Responses to Common Patient Questions on Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Challa, Nayanika
Luskey, Nina
Wang, Daniel
INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2024, 65 (07)
[45] Performance evaluation of ChatGPT-4.0 and Gemini on image-based neurosurgery board practice questions: A comparative analysis
Mcnulty, Alana M.
Valluri, Harshitha
Gajjar, Avi A.
Custozzo, Amanda
Field, Nicholas C.
Paul, Alexandra R.
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2025, 134
[46] A comparative analysis of the ethics of gene editing: ChatGPT vs. Bard
Burright, Jack
Al-khateeb, Samer
COMPUTATIONAL AND MATHEMATICAL ORGANIZATION THEORY, 2024,
[47] A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT, ChatGPT-4, and Google Bard Performances at the Advanced Burn Life Support Exam
Alessandri-Bonetti, Mario
Liu, Hilary Y.
Donovan, James M.
Ziembicki, Jenny A.
Egro, Francesco M.
JOURNAL OF BURN CARE & RESEARCH, 2024, 45 (04): : 945 - 948
[48] Comparative analysis of ChatGPT and Gemini (Bard) in medical inquiry: a scoping review
Fattah, Fattah H.
Salih, Abdulwahid M.
Salih, Ameer M.
Asaad, Saywan K.
Ghafour, Abdullah K.
Bapir, Rawa
Abdalla, Berun A.
Othman, Snur
Ahmed, Sasan M.
Hasan, Sabah Jalal
Mahmood, Yousif M.
Kakamad, Fahmi H.
FRONTIERS IN DIGITAL HEALTH, 2025, 7
[49] Human versus Artificial Intelligence: ChatGPT-4 Outperforming Bing, Bard, ChatGPT-3.5 and Humans in Clinical Chemistry Multiple-Choice Questions
Sallam, Malik
Al-Salahat, Khaled
Eid, Huda
Egger, Jan
Puladi, Behrus
ADVANCES IN MEDICAL EDUCATION AND PRACTICE, 2024, 15 : 857 - 871
[50] The ability of artificial intelligence tools to formulate orthopaedic clinical decisions in comparison to human clinicians: An analysis of ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4, and Bard
Agharia, Suzen
Szatkowski, Jan
Fraval, Andrew
Stevens, Jarrad
Zhou, Yushy
JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS, 2024, 50 : 1 - 7

← 1 2 3 4 5 →