Cited by 119Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationMachine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Evaluating the use of large language models to provide clinical recommendations in the Emergency Department

Open access
Williams, Christopher Y. K., Miao, Brenda Y., Kornblith, Aaron E., Butte, Atul J.·2024·Nature Communications

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-024-52415-1

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

  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)
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
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