Abstract:Background: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved great progress in natural language processing tasks and demonstrated the potential for use in clinical applications. Despite their capabilities, LLMs in the medical domain are prone to generating hallucinations (not fully reliable responses). Hallucinations in LLMs' responses create substantial risks, potentially threatening patients' physical safety. Thus, to perceive and prevent this safety risk, it is essential to evaluate LLMs in the medical domain and build a systematic evaluation. Objective: We developed a comprehensive evaluation system, MedGPTEval, composed of criteria, medical data sets in Chinese, and publicly available benchmarks. Methods: First, a set of evaluation criteria was designed based on a comprehensive literature review. Second, existing candidate criteria were optimized by using a Delphi method with 5 experts in medicine and engineering. Third, 3 clinical experts designed medical data sets to interact with LLMs. Finally, benchmarking experiments were conducted on the data sets. The responses generated by chatbots based on LLMs were recorded for blind evaluations by 5 licensed medical experts. The evaluation criteria that were obtained covered medical professional capabilities, social comprehensive capabilities, contextual capabilities, and computational robustness, with 16 detailed indicators. The medical data sets include 27 medical dialogues and 7 case reports in Chinese. Three chatbots were evaluated: ChatGPT by OpenAI; ERNIE Bot by Baidu, Inc; and Doctor PuJiang (Dr PJ) by Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Results: Dr PJ outperformed ChatGPT and ERNIE Bot in the multiple-turn medical dialogues and case report scenarios. Dr PJ also outperformed ChatGPT in the semantic consistency rate and complete error rate category, indicating better robustness. However, Dr PJ had slightly lower scores in medical professional capabilities compared with ChatGPT in the multiple-turn dialogue scenario. Conclusions: MedGPTEval provides comprehensive criteria to evaluate chatbots by LLMs in the medical domain, open-source data sets, and benchmarks assessing 3 LLMs. Experimental results demonstrate that Dr PJ outperforms ChatGPT and ERNIE Bot in social and professional contexts. Therefore, such an assessment system can be easily adopted by researchers in this community to augment an open-source data set.

A benchmark for automatic medical consultation system: frameworks, tasks and datasets

MedDialog: A Large-scale Medical Dialogue Dataset

MedDialog: Two Large-scale Medical Dialogue Datasets

Task-oriented Dialogue System for Automatic Diagnosis.

MedDG: An Entity-Centric Medical Consultation Dataset for Entity-Aware Medical Dialogue Generation

LCMDC: Large-scale Chinese Medical Dialogue Corpora for Automatic Triage and Medical Consultation

Medical Dialogue: A Survey of Categories, Methods, Evaluation and Challenges

AI Hospital: Benchmarking Large Language Models in a Multi-agent Medical Interaction Simulator

MidMed: Towards Mixed-Type Dialogues for Medical Consultation

Understanding Patient Query with Weak Supervision from Doctor Response

Large Language Model Benchmarks in Medical Tasks

A Speaker-Aware Co-Attention Framework for Medical Dialogue Information Extraction

DialMed: A Dataset for Dialogue-based Medication Recommendation

Benchmarking Large Language Models on Communicative Medical Coaching: a Novel System and Dataset

AI.vs.Clinician: Unveiling Intricate Interactions Between AI and Clinicians through an Open-Access Database

ChatDoctor: A Medical Chat Model Fine-tuned on LLaMA Model using Medical Domain Knowledge

An Automatic Evaluation Framework for Multi-turn Medical Consultations Capabilities of Large Language Models

Data Set and Benchmark (MedGPTEval) to Evaluate Responses From Large Language Models in Medicine: Evaluation Development and Validation

Terminology-aware Medical Dialogue Generation

MedGPTEval: A Dataset and Benchmark to Evaluate Responses of Large Language Models in Medicine

Benchmark datasets driving artificial intelligence development fail to capture the needs of medical professionals