Home
Abstract
My Abstract(s)
Login
ePosters
Back
Final Presentation Format
Eposter Presentation
Eposter in PDF Format
Accept format: PDF. The file size should not be more than 5MB
Eposter in Image Format
Accept format: PNG/JPG/WEBP. The file size should not be more than 2MB
Presentation Date / Time
Submission Status
Draft
Abstract
Abstract Title
Comparative Evaluation of AI Models for Generating Urology Admission Summaries Using QNOTE Scores
Presentation Type
Podium Abstract
Manuscript Type
Clinical Research
Abstract Category *
AI in Urology
Author's Information
Number of Authors (including submitting/presenting author) *
4
No more than 10 authors can be listed (as per the Good Publication Practice (GPP) Guidelines).
Please ensure the authors are listed in the right order.
Country
Taiwan
Co-author 1
Liang-Chen Huang sam831009@gmail.com En Chu Kong Hospital Urology New Taipei City Taiwan *
Co-author 2
Jung-Yang Yu ericyu29218218@gmail.com National Taiwan University Hospital Urology Taipei City Taiwan
Co-author 3
Chung-Cheng Wang ericwcc@ms27.hinet.net En Chu Kong Hospital Urology New Taipei City Taiwan
Co-author 4
Juan-Hua Hong cliffordhong622@gmail.com National Taiwan University Hospital Urology Taipei City Taiwan
Co-author 5
Co-author 6
Co-author 7
Co-author 8
Co-author 9
Co-author 10
Co-author 11
Co-author 12
Co-author 13
Co-author 14
Co-author 15
Co-author 16
Co-author 17
Co-author 18
Co-author 19
Co-author 20
Abstract Content
Introduction
The urology department routinely handles a high volume of inpatient elective procedures, contributing to a demanding clinical environment. The application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the potential to streamline repetitive tasks, particularly in clinical documentation. This study aims to evaluate the performance and accuracy of generative AI and large language models (GAI/LLMs) in producing admission summaries based on outpatient clinic notes.
Materials and Methods
Patients undergoing inpatient elective procedures, arranged through outpatient clinic visits between January and April 2024, were included in this study. AI models, GPT-4 (Model 1) and GPT-4o (Model 2), were prompted to generate admission summaries based on a single outpatient clinic note per patient. The quality of the generated summaries was assessed using the QNOTE scoring system, a non-disease-specific, 12-category, 44-individual-item rubric that evaluates the quality of clinical documentation across various domains.
Results
A total of 14 patients were included in the evaluation. Both AI models produced high-quality admission summaries, with Model 1 (GPT-4) achieving an average QNOTE score of 87.92, and Model 2 (GPT-4o) scoring 91.48 (out of 100). Both models achieved perfect scores in several categories. However, Model 2 consistently outperformed Model 1 in both subjective assessments and across multiple QNOTE domains. The distribution of QNOTE scores for the outpatient clinic notes, comparing Model 1 and Model 2, is shown in Figure 1.
Conclusions
GAI/LLMs demonstrate the capability to generate high-quality admission summaries for inpatient elective urology procedures based on a single outpatient clinic note. GPT-4o outperformed GPT-4 in both objective and subjective evaluations. While these AI models show strong potential, it remains essential for clinicians to review the generated summaries for accuracy and consistency. Further research with larger sample sizes and continued development of AI models are necessary to validate these findings and refine their clinical application.
Keywords
large language models, repetitive documentation, efficiency
Figure 1
https://storage.unitedwebnetwork.com/files/1237/1f48bf101b62211fc5ed576d7e6fe86b.png
Figure 1 Caption
Qualitative assessment of the clinical note. The bars represent the percentage of different components of the 12 elements of QNOTE and an overall note score which is at the bottom of the chart.
Figure 2
Figure 2 Caption
Figure 3
Figure 3 Caption
Figure 4
Figure 4 Caption
Figure 5
Figure 5 Caption
Character Count
2043
Vimeo Link
Presentation Details
Session
Date
Time
Presentation Order