The DOI matches its DataCite record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Large Language Models in Healthcare
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) hold promise for transforming healthcare, from streamlining administrative and clinical workflows to enriching patient engagement and advancing clinical decision-making. However, their successful integration requires rigorous development, adaptation, and evaluation strategies tailored to clinical needs. In this Review, we highlight recent advancements, explore emerging opportunities for LLM-driven innovation, and propose a framework for their responsible implementation in healthcare settings. We examine strategies for adapting LLMs to domain-specific healthcare tasks, such as fine-tuning, prompt engineering, and multimodal integration with electronic health records. We also summarize various evaluation metrics tailored to healthcare, addressing clinical accuracy, fairness, robustness, and patient outcomes. Furthermore, we discuss the challenges associated with deploying LLMs in healthcare--including data privacy, bias mitigation, regulatory compliance, and computational sustainability--and underscore the need for interdisciplinary collaboration. Finally, these challenges present promising future research directions for advancing LLM implementation in clinical settings and healthcare.
Overview
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
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Nonetheless, this remains relevant since not all reasoning failures carry equal clinical risk 17,62 , and automated systems alone are often insufficient for clinical deployment.”
From Structured reasoning failures compromise LLM interpretation of clinical oncology notes (2026) · cites this paper as [62]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sallam, M. (2023) · doi:10.1101/2023.02.19.23286155 · Cited by 3,123 · cited 1×
“26-28 The transformation continues into more specific areas of healthcare delivery and research.”
On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models
Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., Bernstein, M. S., Bohg, J., Bosselut, A., Brunskill, E., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.07258 · Cited by 2,676
Large language models generate functional protein sequences across diverse families
Madani, A., Krause, B., Greene, E. R., Subramanian, S., Mohr, B. P., Holton, J. M., Olmos, J. L., Xiong, C., Sun, Z. Z., Socher, R., et al. (2023) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-022-01618-2 · Cited by 1,078
Health inequities and the inappropriate use of race in nephrology
Eneanya, N. D., Boulware, L. E., Tsai, J., Bruce, M. A., Ford, C. L., Harris, C., Morales, L. S., Ryan, M. J., Reese, P. P., Thorpe, R. J., et al. (2022) · Nature Reviews Nephrology · doi:10.1038/s41581-021-00501-8 · Cited by 140 · cited 2×
“Closed-source models often outperform open-source ones in general tasks but come with higher costs and uncertain performance in healthcare benchmarks [70, 71].”
Cited by
Structured reasoning failures compromise LLM interpretation of clinical oncology notes
Kenaston, M. W., Ayub, U., Parmar, M., Kumar, P., Anjum, M. U., Naqvi, S. A. A., Chaudhuri, A. A., Zakharia, Y., Heath, E. I., Bekaii-Saab, T. S., et al. (2026) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-026-02951-5 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Al-Garadi, M., Mungle, T., Ahmed, A., Sarker, A., Miao, Z., & Matheny, M. E.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- arXiv
- 2503.04748
- References
- 4
- Type
- Preprint
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Large Language Models in Healthcare. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2503.04748
- The paper
- Al-Garadi, M., Mungle, T., Ahmed, A., Sarker, A., Miao, Z., & Matheny, M. E. (2025). Large Language Models in Healthcare. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2503.04748
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.