Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 May 5;16(5):e59662.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.59662. eCollection 2024 May.

Comparative Analysis of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Languages in Predicting Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Scores

Fuat H Saner  1 , Yasemin M Saner  2 , Ehab Abufarhaneh  1 , Dieter C Broering  1 , Dimitri A Raptis  1
Affiliations

Comparative Analysis of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Languages in Predicting Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Scores

Fuat H Saner et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Purpose: The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score plays a crucial role in intensive care units (ICUs) by providing a reliable measure of a patient's organ function or extent of failure. However, the precise assessment is time-consuming, and daily assessment in clinical practice in the ICU can be challenging.

Methods: Realistic scenarios in an ICU setting were created, and the data mining precision of ChatGPT 4.0 Plus, Bard, and Perplexity AI were assessed using Spearman's as well as the intraclass correlation coefficients regarding the accuracy in determining the SOFA score.

Results: The strongest correlation was observed between the actual SOFA score and the score calculated by ChatGPT 4.0 Plus (r correlation coefficient 0.92) (p<0.001). In contrast, the correlation between the actual SOFA and that calculated by Bard was moderate (r=0.59, p=0.070), while the correlation with Perplexity AI was substantial, at 0.89, with a p<0.001. The interclass correlation coefficient analysis of SOFA with those of ChatGPT 4.0 Plus, Bard, and Perplexity AI was ICC=0.94.

Conclusion: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools, particularly ChatGPT 4.0 Plus, show significant promise in assisting with automated SOFA score calculations via AI data mining in ICU settings. They offer a pathway to reduce the manual workload and increase the efficiency of continuous patient monitoring and assessment. However, further development and validation are necessary to ensure accuracy and reliability in a critical care environment.

Keywords: artificial intelligence; bard; chatgpt; large language models; perplexity; sofa score.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparing calculated SOFA score with Perplexity AI, ChatGPT 4.0 Plus, and Bard scores
SOFA: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment
Figure 2
Figure 2. ICC between calculated SOFA score, ChatGPT 4.0 Plus score, Bard score, and Perplexity AI score
ICC: interclass correlation coefficient; SOFA: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score: has the time come for an update? Moreno R, Rhodes A, Piquilloud L, et al. Crit Care. 2023;27:15. - PMC - PubMed
    1. The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Vincent JL, Moreno R, Takala J, et al. Intensive Care Med. 1996;22:707–710. - PubMed
    1. Serial evaluation of the SOFA score to predict outcome in critically ill patients. Ferreira FL, Bota DP, Bross A, Mélot C, Vincent JL. JAMA. 2001;286:1754–1758. - PubMed
    1. Artificial intelligence in intensive care medicine. Mamdani M, Slutsky AS. Intensive Care Med. 2021;47:147–149. - PubMed
    1. Validation of prognostic accuracy of the SOFA score, SIRS criteria, and qSOFA score for in-hospital mortality among cardiac-, thoracic-, and vascular-surgery patients admitted to a cardiothoracic intensive care unit. Zhang Y, Luo H, Wang H, Zheng Z, Ooi OC. J Card Surg. 2020;35:118–127. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources