arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2401.14589cs.CLcs.AI

通过多智能体对话提升诊断准确性:利用大语言模型缓解认知偏差

Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy through Multi-Agent Conversations: Using Large Language Models to Mitigate Cognitive Bias

Singapore General Hospital(新加坡中央医院);Duke-NUS Medical School(杜克-新加坡国立大学医学院);Singapore Eye Research Institute(新加坡眼科研究所);Singapore National Eye Center(新加坡国家眼科中心);Byers Eye Institute, Stanford University(斯坦福大学拜尔斯眼科研究所);National University of Singapore(新加坡国立大学)

Yu He Ke, Rui Yang, Sui An Lie, Taylor Xin Yi Lim, Hairil Rizal Abdullah, Daniel Shu Wei Ting, Nan Liu

AI总结:

本研究针对临床决策中的认知偏差致误诊问题,构建基于GPT-4的四角色多智能体对话框架模拟临床协作,在16个误诊病例的80次模拟中,将首位鉴别诊断准确率从0%提升至71.3%,为复杂医疗场景提升诊断准确性提供了可行方案。

摘要:

研究背景:临床决策中的认知偏差是导致诊断错误、患者预后不佳的重要原因,应对这类偏差是医学领域的一大难题。研究目的:本研究探讨大语言模型(LLM)借助多智能体框架缓解此类偏差的作用,通过多智能体对话模拟临床决策流程,并评估其在提升诊断准确性方面的效果。研究方法:从文献中筛选出16篇已发表和未发表的、因认知偏差导致误诊的病例报告。在多智能体框架中,我们利用GPT-4推动4个模拟智能体之间的交互,复刻临床团队的协作模式。每个智能体承担不同角色:1)综合讨论结果给出最终诊断;2)担任魔鬼代言人,纠正证实偏差与锚定偏差;3)担任导师与讨论推动者,减少过早下结论的偏差;4)记录并总结研究发现。研究共开展80次模拟,评估初始诊断、首位鉴别诊断及最终两项鉴别诊断的准确性。研究结果:在同时评估初始与最终诊断的80份回复中,初始诊断准确率为0%(0/80);经过多智能体讨论后,首位鉴别诊断的准确率提升至71.3%(57/80),最终两项鉴别诊断的准确率提升至80.0%(64/80)。研究结论:该框架展现出重新评估、纠正错误认知的能力,即便在初始检查具有误导性的场景中也能发挥作用。由LLM驱动的多智能体对话框架,在诊断难度较高的医疗场景中具备提升诊断准确性的潜力。

英文摘要:

Background: Cognitive biases in clinical decision-making significantly contribute to errors in diagnosis and suboptimal patient outcomes. Addressing these biases presents a formidable challenge in the medical field. Objective: This study explores the role of large language models (LLMs) in mitigating these biases through the utilization of a multi-agent framework. We simulate the clinical decision-making processes through multi-agent conversation and evaluate its efficacy in improving diagnostic accuracy. Methods: A total of 16 published and unpublished case reports where cognitive biases have resulted in misdiagnoses were identified from the literature. In the multi-agent framework, we leveraged GPT-4 to facilitate interactions among four simulated agents to replicate clinical team dynamics. Each agent has a distinct role: 1) To make the final diagnosis after considering the discussions, 2) The devil's advocate and correct confirmation and anchoring bias, 3) The tutor and facilitator of the discussion to reduce premature closure bias, and 4) To record and summarize the findings. A total of 80 simulations were evaluated for the accuracy of initial diagnosis, top differential diagnosis and final two differential diagnoses. Results: In a total of 80 responses evaluating both initial and final diagnoses, the initial diagnosis had an accuracy of 0% (0/80), but following multi-agent discussions, the accuracy for the top differential diagnosis increased to 71.3% (57/80), and for the final two differential diagnoses, to 80.0% (64/80). Conclusions: The framework demonstrated an ability to re-evaluate and correct misconceptions, even in scenarios with misleading initial investigations. The LLM-driven multi-agent conversation framework shows promise in enhancing diagnostic accuracy in diagnostically challenging medical scenarios.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑