Suppadungsuk, Supawadee

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, particularly machine learning, has brought substantial progress to the field of nephrology, enabling significant improvements in the management of kidney diseases. ChatGPT, a revolutionary language model developed by OpenAI, is a versatile AI model designed to engage in meaningful and informative conversations. Its applications in healthcare have been notable, with demonstrated proficiency in various medical knowledge assessments. However, ChatGPT’s performance varies across different medical subfields, posing challenges in nephrology-related queries. At present, comprehensive reviews regarding ChatGPT’s potential applications in nephrology remain lacking despite the surge of interest in its role in various domains. This article seeks to fill this gap by presenting an overview of the integration of ChatGPT in nephrology. It discusses the potential benefits of ChatGPT in nephrology, encompassing dataset management, diagnostics, treatment planning, and patient communication and education, as well as medical research and education. It also explores ethical and legal concerns regarding the utilization of AI in medical practice. The continuous development of AI models like ChatGPT holds promise for the healthcare realm but also underscores the necessity of thorough evaluation and validation before implementing AI in real-world medical scenarios. This review serves as a valuable resource for nephrologists and healthcare professionals interested in fully utilizing the potential of AI in innovating personalized nephrology care.

The exponential growth of artificial intelligence (AI) has allowed for its integration into multiple sectors, including, notably, healthcare. Chatbots have emerged as a pivotal resource for improving patient outcomes and assisting healthcare practitioners through various AI-based technologies. In critical care, kidney-related conditions play a significant role in determining patient outcomes. This article examines the potential for integrating chatbots into the workflows of critical care nephrology to optimize patient care. We detail their specific applications in critical care nephrology, such as managing acute kidney injury, alert systems, and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT); facilitating discussions around palliative care; and bolstering collaboration within a multidisciplinary team. Chatbots have the potential to augment real-time data availability, evaluate renal health, identify potential risk factors, build predictive models, and monitor patient progress. Moreover, they provide a platform for enhancing communication and education for both patients and healthcare providers, paving the way for enriched knowledge and honed professional skills. However, it is vital to recognize the inherent challenges and limitations when using chatbots in this domain. Here, we provide an in-depth exploration of the concerns tied to chatbots’ accuracy, dependability, data protection and security, transparency, potential algorithmic biases, and ethical implications in critical care nephrology. While human discernment and intervention are indispensable, especially in complex medical scenarios or intricate situations, the sustained advancements in AI signal that the integration of precision-engineered chatbot algorithms within critical care nephrology has considerable potential to elevate patient care and pivotal outcome metrics in the future.

Background and Objectives: Literature reviews are foundational to understanding medical evidence. With AI tools like ChatGPT, Bing Chat and Bard AI emerging as potential aids in this domain, this study aimed to individually assess their citation accuracy within Nephrology, comparing their performance in providing precise. Materials and Methods: We generated the prompt to solicit 20 references in Vancouver style in each 12 Nephrology topics, using ChatGPT, Bing Chat and Bard. We verified the existence and accuracy of the provided references using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. We categorized the validity of the references from the AI chatbot into (1) incomplete, (2) fabricated, (3) inaccurate, and (4) accurate. Results: A total of 199 (83%), 158 (66%) and 112 (47%) unique references were provided from ChatGPT, Bing Chat and Bard, respectively. ChatGPT provided 76 (38%) accurate, 82 (41%) inaccurate, 32 (16%) fabricated and 9 (5%) incomplete references. Bing Chat provided 47 (30%) accurate, 77 (49%) inaccurate, 21 (13%) fabricated and 13 (8%) incomplete references. In contrast, Bard provided 3 (3%) accurate, 26 (23%) inaccurate, 71 (63%) fabricated and 12 (11%) incomplete references. The most common error type across platforms was incorrect DOIs. Conclusions: In the field of medicine, the necessity for faultless adherence to research integrity is highlighted, asserting that even small errors cannot be tolerated. The outcomes of this investigation draw attention to inconsistent citation accuracy across the different AI tools evaluated. Despite some promising results, the discrepancies identified call for a cautious and rigorous vetting of AI-sourced references in medicine. Such chatbots, before becoming standard tools, need substantial refinements to assure unwavering precision in their outputs.

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) necessitate specialized renal diets to prevent complications such as hyperkalemia and hyperphosphatemia. A comprehensive assessment of food components is pivotal, yet burdensome for healthcare providers. With evolving artificial intelligence (AI) technology, models such as ChatGPT, Bard AI, and Bing Chat can be instrumental in educating patients and assisting professionals. To gauge the efficacy of different AI models in discerning potassium and phosphorus content in foods, four AI models—ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4, Bard AI, and Bing Chat—were evaluated. A total of 240 food items, curated from the Mayo Clinic Renal Diet Handbook for CKD patients, were input into each model. These items were characterized by their potassium (149 items) and phosphorus (91 items) content. Each model was tasked to categorize the items into high or low potassium and high phosphorus content. The results were juxtaposed with the Mayo Clinic Renal Diet Handbook’s recommendations. The concordance between repeated sessions was also evaluated to assess model consistency. Among the models tested, ChatGPT 4 displayed superior performance in identifying potassium content, correctly classifying 81% of the foods. It accurately discerned 60% of low potassium and 99% of high potassium foods. In comparison, ChatGPT 3.5 exhibited a 66% accuracy rate. Bard AI and Bing Chat models had an accuracy rate of 79% and 81%, respectively. Regarding phosphorus content, Bard AI stood out with a flawless 100% accuracy rate. ChatGPT 3.5 and Bing Chat recognized 85% and 89% of the high phosphorus foods correctly, while ChatGPT 4 registered a 77% accuracy rate. Emerging AI models manifest a diverse range of accuracy in discerning potassium and phosphorus content in foods suitable for CKD patients. ChatGPT 4, in particular, showed a marked improvement over its predecessor, especially in detecting potassium content. The Bard AI model exhibited exceptional precision for phosphorus identification. This study underscores the potential of AI models as efficient tools in renal dietary planning, though refinements are warranted for optimal utility.

This comprehensive critical review critically examines the ethical implications associated with integrating chatbots into nephrology, aiming to identify concerns, propose policies, and offer potential solutions. Acknowledging the transformative potential of chatbots in healthcare, responsible implementation guided by ethical considerations is of the utmost importance. The review underscores the significance of establishing robust guidelines for data collection, storage, and sharing to safeguard privacy and ensure data security. Future research should prioritize defining appropriate levels of data access, exploring anonymization techniques, and implementing encryption methods. Transparent data usage practices and obtaining informed consent are fundamental ethical considerations. Effective security measures, including encryption technologies and secure data transmission protocols, are indispensable for maintaining the confidentiality and integrity of patient data. To address potential biases and discrimination, the review suggests regular algorithm reviews, diversity strategies, and ongoing monitoring. Enhancing the clarity of chatbot capabilities, developing user-friendly interfaces, and establishing explicit consent procedures are essential for informed consent. Striking a balance between automation and human intervention is vital to preserve the doctor–patient relationship. Cultural sensitivity and multilingual support should be considered through chatbot training. To ensure ethical chatbot utilization in nephrology, it is imperative to prioritize the development of comprehensive ethical frameworks encompassing data handling, security, bias mitigation, informed consent, and collaboration. Continuous research and innovation in this field are crucial for maximizing the potential of chatbot technology and ultimately improving patient outcomes.

Literature reviews are valuable for summarizing and evaluating the available evidence in various medical fields, including nephrology. However, identifying and exploring the potential sources requires focus and time devoted to literature searching for clinicians and researchers. ChatGPT is a novel artificial intelligence (AI) large language model (LLM) renowned for its exceptional ability to generate human-like responses across various tasks. However, whether ChatGPT can effectively assist medical professionals in identifying relevant literature is unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness of ChatGPT in identifying references to literature reviews in nephrology. We keyed the prompt “Please provide the references in Vancouver style and their links in recent literature on… name of the topic” into ChatGPT-3.5 (03/23 Version). We selected all the results provided by ChatGPT and assessed them for existence, relevance, and author/link correctness. We recorded each resource’s citations, authors, title, journal name, publication year, digital object identifier (DOI), and link. The relevance and correctness of each resource were verified by searching on Google Scholar. Of the total 610 references in the nephrology literature, only 378 (62%) of the references provided by ChatGPT existed, while 31% were fabricated, and 7% of citations were incomplete references. Notably, only 122 (20%) of references were authentic. Additionally, 256 (68%) of the links in the references were found to be incorrect, and the DOI was inaccurate in 206 (54%) of the references. Moreover, among those with a link provided, the link was correct in only 20% of cases, and 3% of the references were irrelevant. Notably, an analysis of specific topics in electrolyte, hemodialysis, and kidney stones found that >60% of the references were inaccurate or misleading, with less reliable authorship and links provided by ChatGPT. Based on our findings, the use of ChatGPT as a sole resource for identifying references to literature reviews in nephrology is not recommended. Future studies could explore ways to improve AI language models’ performance in identifying relevant nephrology literature.

Longer pre-transplant dialysis duration is known to be associated with worse post-transplant outcomes. Our study aimed to cluster kidney transplant recipients with prolonged dialysis duration before transplant using an unsupervised machine learning approach to better assess heterogeneity within this cohort. We performed consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 5092 kidney transplant recipients who had been on dialysis ≥ 10 years prior to transplant in the OPTN/UNOS database from 2010 to 2019. We characterized each assigned cluster and compared the posttransplant outcomes. Overall, the majority of patients with ≥10 years of dialysis duration were black (52%) or Hispanic (25%), with only a small number (17.6%) being moderately sensitized. Within this cohort, three clinically distinct clusters were identified. Cluster 1 patients were younger, non-diabetic and non-sensitized, had a lower body mass index (BMI) and received a kidney transplant from younger donors. Cluster 2 recipients were older, unsensitized and had a higher BMI; they received kidney transplant from older donors. Cluster 3 recipients were more likely to be female with a higher PRA. Compared to cluster 1, cluster 2 had lower 5-year death-censored graft (HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.16–1.71) and patient survival (HR 2.98; 95% CI 2.43–3.68). Clusters 1 and 3 had comparable death-censored graft and patient survival. Unsupervised machine learning was used to characterize kidney transplant recipients with prolonged pre-transplant dialysis into three clinically distinct clusters with variable but good post-transplant outcomes. Despite a dialysis duration ≥ 10 years, excellent outcomes were observed in most recipients, including those with moderate sensitization. A disproportionate number of minority recipients were observed within this cohort, suggesting multifactorial delays in accessing kidney transplantation.

Limited data are available on the utilization of sodium thiosulfate (STS) treatment for calciphylaxis in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, while it is well-studied in hemodialysis (HD) patients. A systematic literature search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, EBM Reviews—Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EBM Reviews—Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify reported cases of PD patients with calciphylaxis who received STS. The search covered the inception of the databases through August 2022. Across 19 articles, this review identified 30 PD patients with calciphylaxis who received STS. These included 15 case reports, 2 case series, and 2 cohort studies. The administration routes and doses varied depending on the study. For intravenous (IV) administration (n = 18), STS doses ranged from 3.2 g twice daily to 25 g three times weekly for 5 weeks to 8 months. Outcomes included 44% of patients experiencing successful wound healing, 6% discontinuing STS due to adverse effects, 67% transitioning to HD, and 50% dying from calciphylaxis complications. For intraperitoneal (IP) administration (n = 5), STS doses ranged from 12.5 to 25 g three to four times weekly for 12 h to 3 months. Results showed 80% of patients achieving successful wound healing, 80% discontinuing STS due to adverse effects, 40% transitioning to HD, and 20% dying from IP STS-related chemical peritonitis. In cases where patients switched from IV to IP STS (n = 3), doses ranged from 12.5 to 25 g two to three times weekly for 2.5 to 5 months. Among them, 67% experienced successful wound healing, while 33% died from sepsis. Two cases utilized oral STS at a dose of 1500 mg twice daily for 6 and 11 months, resulting in successful wound healing without adverse effects or need for HD. However, one patient (50%) died due to small bowel obstruction. This systematic review provides an overview of STS treatment for PD patients with calciphylaxis. Although successful treatment cases exist, adverse effects were significant. Further research, including larger clinical studies and pharmacokinetic data, is necessary to establish the optimal route, dose, and efficacy of STS in PD patients.