Large language models in anaesthesiology: use of ChatGPT for American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification
Open accessThe claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
LLMs have demonstrated proficiency by successfully passing advanced medical examinations and scoring clinical risk gradings on par with experienced physicians.
“Notably, these models have demonstrated their proficiency by successfully passing advanced medical examinations [10] and scoring clinical risk gradings on par with experienced physicians [11].”
From Mitigating cognitive biases in clinical decision-making through multi-agent conversations using large language models: simulation study (2024) · cites this paper as [11]
The paper’s main text reports that GPT scored ASA physical status on par with human anaesthesiologists in most simulated patient cases. The citing sentence omits those limits: the study did not test real patients, found that GPT tended to underscore high-acuity cases, and does not establish the comparator physicians’ experience level. The examination claim is attached to a different citation and is not assessed here. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148 · see citing works
ASA Physical Status Classifications
Owens, W. D., Felts, J. A., & Spitznagel, E. L. (1978) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/00000542-197810000-00003 · Cited by 1,971 · see citing works
The ASA Physical Status Classification: Inter-observer Consistency
Mak, P. H. K., Campbell, R. C. H., & Irwin, M. G. (2002) · Anaesthesia and Intensive Care · doi:10.1177/0310057x0203000516 · Cited by 451 · see citing works
Application Scenarios for Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Care: Rapid Review
Seibert, K., Domhoff, D., Bruch, D., Schulte-Althoff, M., Fürstenau, D., Biessmann, F., & Wolf-Ostermann, K. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/26522 · Cited by 314 · see citing works
Riley, R. H., Holman, C. D. J., & Fletcher, D. R. (2014) · Anaesthesia and Intensive Care · doi:10.1177/0310057x1404200511 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence in the Healthcare System: An Overview
Lorkowski, J., Grzegorowska, O., & Pokorski, M. (2021) · Advances in experimental medicine and biology · doi:10.1007/5584_2021_620 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence and Positron Emission Tomography Imaging Workflow
Beegle, C., Hasani, N., Maass‐Moreno, R., Saboury, B., & Siegel, E. L. (2021) · PET Clinics · doi:10.1016/j.cpet.2021.09.008 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ke, Y. H., Jin, L., Elangovan, K., Abdullah, H. R., Liu, N., Sia, A. T. H., Soh, C. R., Tung, J. Y. M., Ong, J. C. L., Kuo, C.-F., et al. (2025) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-025-01519-z · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Self-citationKe, Y., Yang, R., Lie, S. A., Lim, T. X. Y., Ning, Y., Li, I., Abdullah, H. R., Ting, D. S. W., & Liu, N. (2024) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/59439 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Lim, D. Y. Z., Ke, Y. H., Sng, G. G. R., Tung, J. Y. M., Chai, J. X., & Abdullah, H. R.
- Affiliations
- Singapore General Hospital (SG)
- SingHealth (SG)
- Corresponding author
- Abdullah, Hairil R.
- Venue
- British Journal of Anaesthesia
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-09
- Volume
- 131
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- e73-e75
- ISSN
- 0007-0912 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4384700226
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 5
- FWCI
- 0.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- British Journal of Anaesthesia (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Keywords
- large language models, ChatGPT, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, preoperative assessment, interobserver agreement
- MeSH terms
- Anesthesiologists, Anesthesiology, Humans, United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
