Evaluating the use of large language models to provide clinical recommendations in the Emergency Department
Open accessAbstract
The release of GPT-4 and other large language models (LLMs) has the potential to transform healthcare. However, existing research evaluating LLM performance on real-world clinical notes is limited. Here, we conduct a highly-powered study to determine whether LLMs can provide clinical recommendations for three tasks (admission status, radiological investigation(s) request status, and antibiotic prescription status) using clinical notes from the Emergency Department. We randomly selected 10,000 Emergency Department visits to evaluate the accuracy of zero-shot, GPT-3.5-turbo- and GPT-4-turbo-generated clinical recommendations across four different prompting strategies. We found that both GPT-4-turbo and GPT-3.5-turbo performed poorly compared to a resident physician, with accuracy scores 8% and 24%, respectively, lower than physician on average. Both LLMs tended to be overly cautious in its recommendations, with high sensitivity at the cost of specificity. Our findings demonstrate that, while early evaluations of the clinical use of LLMs are promising, LLM performance must be significantly improved before their deployment as decision support systems for clinical recommendations and other complex tasks.
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.
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 demonstrated limited performance in providing medical recommendations in real-world emergency room encounters.
“Notably, LLMs also demonstrated limited performance in providing medical recommendations in real-world emergency room encounters in a recent large-scale study13”
From Limitations of large language models in clinical problem-solving arising from inflexible reasoning (2025) · cites this paper as [13]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 119
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [29]Brown T. B. et al. Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv10.48550/arXiv.2005.14165 (2020).
- Authors
- Williams, C. Y. K., Miao, B. Y., Kornblith, A. E., & Butte, A. J.
- Affiliations
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- Corresponding author
- Williams, Christopher Y. K.
- Venue
- Nature Communications
- Published
- 2024-10-08
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 8236-8236
- ISSN
- 2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11461960
- OpenAlex
- W4403229099
- Cited by
- 119
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 59 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 5
- FWCI
- 11.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- University of California, San Francisco
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K23HD110716)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- large language models, clinical decision support, emergency department, clinical notes, GPT-4, GPT-3.5-turbo, zero-shot prompting, admission status, antibiotic prescribing, physician comparison, diagnostic accuracy
- MeSH terms
- Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Humans, Male, Electronic Health Records
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