Abstract
Background: Generative artificial intelligence (AI), particularly in the form of large language models, has rapidly developed. The LLaMA series are popular and recently updated from LLaMA2 to LLaMA3. However, the impacts of the update on diagnostic performance have not been well documented. Objective: We conducted a comparative evaluation of the diagnostic performance in differential diagnosis lists generated by LLaMA3 and LLaMA2 for case reports. Methods: We analyzed case reports published in the American Journal of Case Reports from 2022 to 2023. After excluding nondiagnostic and pediatric cases, we input the remaining cases into LLaMA3 and LLaMA2 using the same prompt and the same adjustable parameters. Diagnostic performance was defined by whether the differential diagnosis lists included the final diagnosis. Multiple physicians independently evaluated whether the final diagnosis was included in the top 10 differentials generated by LLaMA3 and LLaMA2. Results: In our comparative evaluation of the diagnostic performance between LLaMA3 and LLaMA2, we analyzed differential diagnosis lists for 392 case reports. The final diagnosis was included in the top 10 differentials generated by LLaMA3 in 79.6% (312/392) of the cases, compared to 49.7% (195/392) for LLaMA2, indicating a statistically significant improvement (P
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Hirosawa, T., Harada, Y., Tokumasu, K., Shiraishi, T., Suzuki, T., & Shimizu, T. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Diagnostic Performance: Differential Diagnosis Lists by LLaMA3 Versus LLaMA2 for Case Reports. JMIR Formative Research, 8. https://doi.org/10.2196/64844
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.