PubMed دسترسی آزاد

Performance and Hallucination Analysis of Large Language Models on European Anesthesiology Examinations: Cross-Sectional Comparative Study.

استودیوی صوتی مقاله

پخش حرفه‌ای فارسی و انگلیسی

در حال بررسی نسخه‌های صوتی ذخیره‌شده…

صوت تولیدشده با هوش مصنوعی است. برای کاربرد علمی یا درمانی، متن و منبع اصلی را بررسی کنید.
خواندن هوشمند فارسی و انگلیسی در حال آماده‌سازی صداهای مرورگر…
تنظیم صدای طبیعی و سرعت

صداهایی که در نامشان «Natural»، «Neural» یا «Online» دیده می‌شود معمولاً طبیعی‌ترند. انتخاب صدا به صداهای نصب‌شده در ویندوز و مرورگر شما بستگی دارد.

چکیده اصلی

BACKGROUND: Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising performance on medical examinations across specialties. However, comparative evaluations of current-generation LLMs across multiple European anesthesiology examinations, alongside structured assessment of hallucinations vs question-related confusion, remain lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the performance of 4 state-of-the-art LLMs on anesthesiology and intensive medicine examination questions and assess their hallucination rates. METHODS: This computational comparative study analyzed 437 multiple-choice questions (1748 queries) from 3 sources: nurse anesthetist school examinations (infirmier anesthésiste diplômé d'État [registered nurse anesthetist]; n=100, 22.9%), European Diploma in Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EDAIC; n=219, 50.1%), and EDAIC On-Line Assessment (n=118, 27.0%). Each question was submitted to 4 LLMs (Claude Sonnet 4.5, Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-5, and Grok 4) using standardized prompts via default web interface settings. Responses were evaluated through structured consensus review by 2 examiners for accuracy, hallucinations, and question-related confusion. Statistical analysis included Friedman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with Holm-Bonferroni correction, the Cochran Q test, and generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Average success rates ranged from 86% (SD 18%) to 94% (SD 10%) across LLMs and examination types, exceeding the EDAIC part I passing threshold, representing substantial improvement over previously reported GPT-3.5 performance. For the EDAIC, overall intermodel differences were significant (Friedman χ23=13.9; P=.003; W=0.02), with Gemini outperforming GPT-5 as the only pairwise difference. Hallucination rates ranged from 11% (11/100) to 20.1% (44/219) without significant intermodel differences. All models exceeded the EDAIC passing threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Current-generation LLMs demonstrated consistently high performance across multiple European anesthesiology examinations but continue to produce clinically relevant hallucinations, supporting their role as supervised educational tools rather than autonomous learning resources. These findings underscore the need for structured integration frameworks and systematic verification when deploying LLMs as learning tools in medical education.

متن کامل اصلی

نسخه دارای مجوز در منبع علمی در دسترس است.

لینک مستقیم از metadata منبع گرفته شده و در تب جدید باز می‌شود.

باز کردن متن کامل

کلیدواژه‌ها

AIanesthesiologyartificial intelligenceexaminationhallucinationsintensive care medicinelarge language modelsmedical educationmultiple-choice questions
در همین زیرشاخه

مقاله‌های مرتبط

PubMed2027

Global Genomic Surveillance.

Global genomic surveillance has emerged as a foundational pillar of public health in the twenty-first century, enabling real-time tracking of pathogen evolution and informing outbreak response. This chapter examines the strategic architecture of global genomic surveillance, focusing on its application to arboviruses such as chikungunya virus (CHIKV). It explores the integration of genomic data with epidemiological, clinical, and enviro…

PubMed2026

Development and Nationwide Multicentre Evaluation of Guideline-Grounded Large Language Model Chatbots to Support Patient Self-Management and Education in Rheumatology.

Patients with rheumatic diseases have persistent information needs that are not fully addressed in routine care. We developed and evaluated guideline-grounded, large language model (LLM) chatbots to support patient self-management and education in rheumatology.Ten disease-specific chatbots based on German guidelines were co-developed and deployed through 13 rheumatology centres and six patient organisations. Chatbot users rated respons…

PubMed2026

Liability and Standard of Care in AI-Driven Psychiatric Practice: European Viewpoint.

AI is increasingly incorporated into psychiatric triage, risk prediction, passive monitoring, clinical documentation, and patient-facing conversational systems. These applications may improve access, continuity, efficiency, and pattern recognition, but they also redistribute epistemic authority and complicate responsibility when harm occurs. European regulation is developed in relation to market access, data governance, risk management…

PubMed2026

Routine laboratory panels classify internal medicine ICD-10 code groups: comparison with frontier large language models and laboratory-only specialist assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Routine laboratory panels are nearly universal, but the panels' joint information is underused. We evaluated contemporaneous classification of International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) code groups from same-encounter laboratory results. METHODS: We developed 17 eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) classifiers in 242 648 adult internal medicine encounters using age, sex, and results from …