Accuracy Of Spirometric Interpretation by Artificial Intelligence-Based Software in Comparison with Spirometric Interpretation by A Qualified Respiratory Physician in A Tertiary Care Center in Chengalpattu District

Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming respiratory care by enhancing diagnostic accuracy and streamlining workflows. The efficacy of free AI tools for spirometry interpretation, particularly in the Indian population, remains largely unassessed. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT for spirometry interpretation compared with that of qualified respiratory physicians in a south Indian tertiary care setting. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 100 anonymised spirometry reports that met the ATS/ERS criteria. These reports were interpreted by respiratory physicians (gold standard), and the same reports were uploaded to ChatGPT. Interpretations of the spirometry were based on ATS/ERS guidelines using Z-scores and flow-volume loops. Statistical analyses included specificity, sensitivity using proportion agreement, kappa statistics, and ROC curve analyses. Results: The 100 spirometry reports simultaneously analysed by AI & respiratory physicians overall normal vs. abnormal classification accuracy was 99%. For Z-score interpretation, the AI reported normal (25% vs. 26%), restriction (22% vs. 19%) obstruction (39% vs. 28%), and mixed (17% vs. 24%) compared to respiratory physician interpretation. In classifying flow-volume loop patterns, AI showed normal (30% vs 26%), restriction (18% vs. 26%) obstruction (50% vs. 38%), and mixed (2% vs. 10%) compared with respiratory physicians. In the final interpretation combining z-score & flow volume loop, AI interpretation was - 25% normal, 19% restriction, 39% obstruction, & 17% mixed, compared to the respiratory physician interpretation 26% normal, 21% restriction, 29% obstruction, & 24% mixed. AI achieved 99% agreement for normal, 98% for restriction, 90% for obstruction 93% for mixed. Conclusion: ChatGPT is a promising tool for spirometry interpretation, but other similar AI platforms with larger samples need to be assessed before formal recommendations can be made.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Neonatal Surgery
Published
2025-06-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.63682/jns.v14i32s.7462
Primary Topic
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Accuracy Of Spirometric Interpretation by Artificial Intelligence-Based Software in Comparison with Spirometric Interpretation by A Qualified Respiratory Physician in A Tertiary Care Center in Chengalpattu District

Shanker Mohan, Aruna Shanmuganathan, S Rohita, J.Sam Selva Shruthi et al.
Journal of Neonatal Surgery
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
article

Accuracy Of Spirometric Interpretation by Artificial Intelligence-Based Software in Comparison with Spirometric Interpretation by A Qualified Respiratory Physician in A Tertiary Care Center in Chengalpattu District

Shanker Mohan, Aruna Shanmuganathan, S Rohita, J.Sam Selva Shruthi, A. Chitrakumar
article en

Abstract

Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming respiratory care by enhancing diagnostic accuracy and streamlining workflows. The efficacy of free AI tools for spirometry interpretation, particularly in the Indian population, remains largely unassessed. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT for spirometry interpretation compared with that of qualified respiratory physicians in a south Indian tertiary care setting. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 100 anonymised spirometry reports that met the ATS/ERS criteria. These reports were interpreted by respiratory physicians (gold standard), and the same reports were uploaded to ChatGPT. Interpretations of the spirometry were based on ATS/ERS guidelines using Z-scores and flow-volume loops. Statistical analyses included specificity, sensitivity using proportion agreement, kappa statistics, and ROC curve analyses. Results: The 100 spirometry reports simultaneously analysed by AI & respiratory physicians overall normal vs. abnormal classification accuracy was 99%. For Z-score interpretation, the AI reported normal (25% vs. 26%), restriction (22% vs. 19%) obstruction (39% vs. 28%), and mixed (17% vs. 24%) compared to respiratory physician interpretation. In classifying flow-volume loop patterns, AI showed normal (30% vs 26%), restriction (18% vs. 26%) obstruction (50% vs. 38%), and mixed (2% vs. 10%) compared with respiratory physicians. In the final interpretation combining z-score & flow volume loop, AI interpretation was - 25% normal, 19% restriction, 39% obstruction, & 17% mixed, compared to the respiratory physician interpretation 26% normal, 21% restriction, 29% obstruction, & 24% mixed. AI achieved 99% agreement for normal, 98% for restriction, 90% for obstruction 93% for mixed. Conclusion: ChatGPT is a promising tool for spirometry interpretation, but other similar AI platforms with larger samples need to be assessed before formal recommendations can be made.

Journal of Neonatal SurgeryVol. 14(32S)
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Accuracy Of Spirometric Interpretation by Artificial Intelligence-Based Software in Comparison with Spirometric Interpretation by A Qualified Respiratory Physician in A Tertiary Care Center in Chengalpattu District — Shanker Mohan, Aruna Shanmuganathan, et al. · Journal of Neonatal Surgery (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS