Downloads

https://doi.org/10.53941/ijctm.2025.1000011
Severaj, R., Moodley, N., & Gounden, V. Brief Communication: More Chat about Chatbots Assisting with Routine Clinical Biochemistry Queries. International Journal of Clinical and Translational Medicine. 2025. doi: https://doi.org/10.53941/ijctm.2025.1000011
Volume 1, Issue 2, 2025
Copyright (c) 2025 by the authors.
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Original Research Articles

Brief Communication: More Chat about Chatbots Assisting with Routine Clinical Biochemistry Queries

Rucita Severaj, Nareshni Moodley and Verena Gounden*

Department of Chemical Pathology, Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital, University of KwaZulu Natal and National Health Laboratory Service, 800 Vusi Mzimela Road, Cator Manor, Durban 4091, Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa

* Correspondence: verenagounden@yahoo.com; Tel.: +353-9182800

Received: 9 March 2025; Accepted: 25 March 2025; Published: 9 April 2025

Abstract: Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies have the potential to transform many aspects of patient care and is playing an increasing role in health care in diagnostics and patient management. Several studies have already demonstrated that AI can perform as well as or better than humans at key healthcare tasks. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the utility of the AI chatbots ChatGPT and Deepseek to answer everyday chemical pathology queries as handled by the registrars in the Chemical Pathology Department at Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital in Durban, South Africa. Method: All queries received by the registrars over a month period were documented and answers from traditional sources such as laboratory procedures and sample handbooks were documented. The queries were later asked to ChatGPT and Deepseek and further evaluated and the answers evaluated by two blinded senior pathologists in terms of suitability and accuracy of responses and key word recognition. Results: A total of 37 queries were asked to the chatbots. Based on average scoring of the two reviewers 97% (n = 36/37) of queries for ChatGPT responses and 73% (n = 27) for Deepseek were ranked 3 and above for suitability and accuracy. The poorly scoring responses from both Deepseek and ChatGPT related to questions that were very specific to the local laboratory or testing in the laboratory. Conclusion: A longer-term evaluation and verification of ChatGPT as a resource to assist with lab related queries is required. It may be a useful resource not only to the trainee chemical pathology registrar but to under-resourced health care settings where pathologist support may not be present.

Keywords:

artificial intelligence clinical biochemistry

References

  1. Homolak, J. Opportunities and risks of ChatGPT in medicine, science, and academic publishing: A modern Promethean dilemma. Croat. Med. J. 2023, 64, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2023.64.1.
  2. Sng, G.G.R.; Tung, J.Y.M.; Lim, D.Y.Z.; et al. Potential and Pitfalls of ChatGPT and natural language artificial intelligence models for Diabetes Education. Diabetes Care 2023, 10, e1–e3.
  3. Bibault, J.-E.; Chaix, B.; Guillemasse, A.; et al. A chatbot versus physicians to provide information for patients with breast cancer: Blind, randomized controlled noninferiority trial. J. Med. Internet Res. 2019, 21, e15787.
  4. Editorial: Will ChatGPT transform healthcare? Nat. Med. 2023, 29, 505–506. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02289-5.
  5. Paranjape, K.; Schinkel, M.; Hammer, R.D.; et al. The Value of Artificial Intelligence in Laboratory Medicine: Current Opinions and Barriers to Implementation. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2021, 155, 823–831. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqaa170.
  6. Dave, T.; Athaluri, S.A.; Singh, S. ChatGPT in medicine: An overview of its applications, advantages, limitations, future prospects, and ethical considerations. Front. Artif. Intell. 2023, 6, 1169595. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1169595.