Healthcare, Vol. 13, Pages 1394: Gender Differences in the Use of ChatGPT as Generative Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Research and Decision-Making in Occupational Medicine

Healthcare doi: 10.3390/healthcare13121394

Authors:
Patricia Mashburn
Felix A. Weuthen
Nelly Otte
Hanif Krabbe
Gerardo M. Fernandez
Thomas Kraus
Julia Krabbe

Background/Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved from early diagnostic expert systems to advanced generative models, such as GPT-4, which are increasingly being used in healthcare. Concerns persist regarding inaccuracies and input dependency. This study aimed to deliver initial insights into whether gender influences the interaction of medical professionals with generative AI. Methods: This analysis investigated gender differences in medical students’ and physicians’ interactions with ChatGPT-4 while researching occupational medicine cases in a randomized controlled study. Participants assessed cases involving asbestos-related disease, metal sulfate allergy, and berylliosis using ChatGPT. Inputs and outputs were evaluated for accuracy, confabulations, communication styles, and user satisfaction. Demographic data and self-assessments of occupational medicine knowledge before and after the tasks were also collected. Results: Among 27 participants (63% women, 37% men), women showed greater knowledge improvement after using ChatGPT, particularly in asbestos-related cancer identification. No significant gender differences emerged in diagnostic accuracy, reporting procedures, or satisfaction with ChatGPT. Women exhibited significantly higher self-rated competence after using the ChatGPT application, while men only showed minimal change. Input from the female participants led to more confabulations, although response accuracy remained comparable. Conclusions: This study offers the first real-world insights into the use of generative AI in occupational medicine, highlighting the importance of understanding user-dependent variability in AI-supported clinical practice and decision-making. These findings underscore the need for gender-sensitive AI literacy training in medical education, accommodating diverse interaction styles and strategies to mitigate AI-generated misinformation. Future research with larger and more diverse cohorts could provide deeper insights into the influence of gender, age, and experience on AI utilization in healthcare. Integrating gender-based interaction differences into AI training and applications may improve clinical performance and promote more equitable healthcare practices.

Source link

Patricia Mashburn www.mdpi.com