131 research outputs found

    The Consistency and Quality of ChatGPT Responses Compared to Clinical Guidelines for Ovarian Cancer: A Delphi Approach

    Get PDF
    Introduction: In recent years, generative Artificial Intelligence models, such as ChatGPT, have increasingly been utilized in healthcare. Despite acknowledging the high potential of AI models in terms of quick access to sources and formulating responses to a clinical question, the results obtained using these models still require validation through comparison with established clinical guidelines. This study compares the responses of the AI model to eight clinical questions with the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) guidelines for ovarian cancer. Materials and Methods: The authors used the Delphi method to evaluate responses from ChatGPT and the AIOM guidelines. An expert panel of healthcare professionals assessed responses based on clarity, consistency, comprehensiveness, usability, and quality using a five-point Likert scale. The GRADE methodology assessed the evidence quality and the recommendations’ strength. Results: A survey involving 14 physicians revealed that the AIOM guidelines consistently scored higher averages compared to the AI models, with a statistically significant difference. Post hoc tests showed that AIOM guidelines significantly differed from all AI models, with no significant difference among the AI models. Conclusions: While AI models can provide rapid responses, they must match established clinical guidelines regarding clarity, consistency, comprehensiveness, usability, and quality. These findings underscore the importance of relying on expert-developed guidelines in clinical decision-making and highlight potential areas for AI model improvement

    A comparison of arbitration procedures for risk averse disputants

    Get PDF
    We propose an arbitration model framework that generalizes many previous quantitative models of final offer arbitration, conventional arbitration, and some proposed alternatives to them. Our model allows the two disputants to be risk averse and assumes that the issue(s) in dispute can be summarized by a single quantifiable value. We compare the performance of the different arbitration procedures by analyzing the gap between the disputants' equilibrium offers and the width of the contract zone that these offers imply. Our results suggest that final offer arbitration should give results superior to those of conventional arbitration.Natural Sciences & Engineering Research Council (NSERC) Discovery Gran

    Best-shot versus weakest-link in political lobbying: an application of group all-pay auction

    Get PDF
    We analyze a group political lobbying all-pay auction with a group specific public good prize, in which one group follows a weakest-link and the other group follows a best-shot impact function. We completely characterize all semi-symmetric equilibria. There are two types of equilibria: (1) each player in the best-shot group puts mass at the upper bound of the support, whereas each player in the other group puts mass at the lower bound of the support; (2) players in the best-shot group put masses at both the lower and the upper bounds, while the other group randomizes without a mass point. An earlier and longer version of this study was circulated under the title “The Group All-pay Auction with Heterogeneous Impact Functions.” We appreciate the comments of an Associate Editor and two anonymous referees, Kyung Hwan Baik, Walter Enders, Matt Van Essen, Paan Jindapon, David Malueg, Paul Pecorino, Seth Streitmatter, Ted Turocy, the participants at the 2015 conference of ‘Contest: Theory and Evidence’ at the University of East Anglia, and the seminar participants at the University of Alabama and Korea University. Iryna Topolyan gratefully acknowledges the support from the Charles Phelps Taft Research Center. Any remaining errors are our own

    Taxes and Fiscal Sociology

    Get PDF
    This article reviews recent research in fiscal sociology. We specifically examine contributions to the study of taxation that illuminate core issues in the sociology of contemporary capitalism, including the causes of poverty and inequality in rich countries and of inequality between rich and poor countries. Research on developed countries suggests that tax policy changes are important for explaining rising income inequality, tax policies may structure durable inequalities of race and gender, and earnings-conditional tax subsidies may alleviate poverty more effectively and with less stigma than means-tested social spending. Scholars also find the most generous welfare states rely the most heavily on regressive taxes, although there is disagreement over how this association arises. Comparative research on developing countries shows consumption taxes are more conducive to growth than taxes on income, tax-financed spending benefits growth if it is spent on productive investments, and taxation strengthened democracy and state building in medieval and early modern Europe. However, there is disagreement as to whether taxation contributes to state building in contemporary developing countries and whether foreign aid undermines democracy by undermining taxation. These questions are the focus of considerable current research
    corecore