Assessing the Role of the Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) in Alzheimer’s Disease Management: Comparative Study of Neurologist- and Artificial Intelligence–Generated Responses
Authors: Zeng Jiaqi , Zou Xiaoyi , Li Shirong , Tang Yao , Teng Sisi , Li Huanhuan , Wang Changyu , Wu Yuxuan , Zhang Luyao , Zhong Yunheng , Liu Jialin , Liu Siru 
Published: October 2024

Background
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder posing challenges to patients, caregivers, and society. Accessible and accurate information is crucial for effective AD management.

Objective
This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, comprehensibility, clarity, and usefulness of the Generative Pretrained Transformer’s (GPT) answers concerning the management and caregiving of patients with AD.

Methods
In total, 14 questions related to the prevention, treatment, and care of AD were identified and posed to GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in Chinese and English, respectively, and 4 respondent neurologists were asked to answer them. We generated 8 sets of responses (total 112) and randomly coded them in answer sheets. Next, 5 evaluator neurologists and 5 family members of patients were asked to rate the 112 responses using separate 5-point Likert scales. We evaluated the quality of the responses using a set of 8 questions rated on a 5-point Likert scale. To gauge comprehensibility and participant satisfaction, we included 3 questions dedicated to each aspect within the same set of 8 questions.

Results
As of April 10, 2023, the 5 evaluator neurologists and 5 family members of patients with AD rated the 112 responses: GPT-3.5: n=28, 25%, responses; GPT-4: n=28, 25%, responses; respondent neurologists: 56 (50%) responses. The top 5 (4.5%) responses rated by evaluator neurologists had 4 (80%) GPT (GPT-3.5+GPT-4) responses and 1 (20%) respondent neurologist’s response. For the top 5 (4.5%) responses rated by patients’ family members, all but the third response were GPT responses. Based on the evaluation by neurologists, the neurologist-generated responses achieved a mean score of 3.9 (SD 0.7), while the GPT-generated responses scored significantly higher (mean 4.4, SD 0.6; P<.001). Language and model analyses revealed no significant differences in response quality between the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 models (GPT-3.5: mean 4.3, SD 0.7; GPT-4: mean 4.4, SD 0.5; P=.51). However, English responses outperformed Chinese responses in terms of comprehensibility (Chinese responses: mean 4.1, SD 0.7; English responses: mean 4.6, SD 0.5; P=.005) and participant satisfaction (Chinese responses: mean 4.2, SD 0.8; English responses: mean 4.5, SD 0.5; P=.04). According to the evaluator neurologists’ review, Chinese responses had a mean score of 4.4 (SD 0.6), whereas English responses had a mean score of 4.5 (SD 0.5; P=.002). As for the family members of patients with AD, no significant differences were observed between GPT and neurologists, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, or Chinese and English responses.

Conclusions
GPT can provide patient education materials on AD for patients, their families and caregivers, nurses, and neurologists. This capability can contribute to the effective health care management of patients with AD, leading to enhanced patient outcomes.