Comparisons between a Large Language Model-based Real-Time Compound Diagnostic Medical AI Interface and Physicians for Common Internal Medicine Cases using Simulated Patients
This addresses the problem of improving efficiency and accuracy in primary care diagnostics for common internal medicine cases, though it is incremental as it builds on existing LLM and diagnostic methods.
The study developed an LLM-based real-time diagnostic AI interface and compared it to physicians in a clinical trial using simulated patients for common internal medicine cases, finding that the AI achieved 80% accuracy in first differential diagnosis (vs. 50-70% for physicians) and reduced time by 44.6% and costs by 98.1%.
Objective To develop an LLM based realtime compound diagnostic medical AI interface and performed a clinical trial comparing this interface and physicians for common internal medicine cases based on the United States Medical License Exam (USMLE) Step 2 Clinical Skill (CS) style exams. Methods A nonrandomized clinical trial was conducted on August 20, 2024. We recruited one general physician, two internal medicine residents (2nd and 3rd year), and five simulated patients. The clinical vignettes were adapted from the USMLE Step 2 CS style exams. We developed 10 representative internal medicine cases based on actual patients and included information available on initial diagnostic evaluation. Primary outcome was the accuracy of the first differential diagnosis. Repeatability was evaluated based on the proportion of agreement. Results The accuracy of the physicians' first differential diagnosis ranged from 50% to 70%, whereas the realtime compound diagnostic medical AI interface achieved an accuracy of 80%. The proportion of agreement for the first differential diagnosis was 0.7. The accuracy of the first and second differential diagnoses ranged from 70% to 90% for physicians, whereas the AI interface achieved an accuracy rate of 100%. The average time for the AI interface (557 sec) was 44.6% shorter than that of the physicians (1006 sec). The AI interface ($0.08) also reduced costs by 98.1% compared to the physicians' average ($4.2). Patient satisfaction scores ranged from 4.2 to 4.3 for care by physicians and were 3.9 for the AI interface Conclusion An LLM based realtime compound diagnostic medical AI interface demonstrated diagnostic accuracy and patient satisfaction comparable to those of a physician, while requiring less time and lower costs. These findings suggest that AI interfaces may have the potential to assist primary care consultations for common internal medicine cases.