Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38480911›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology2024

Clinical decision support for bipolar depression using large language models.

Roy H Perlis, Joseph F Goldberg, Michael J Ostacher, Christopher D Schneck

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
19.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Artificial Intelligence-Empowered Multimodal Learning in Psychiatry: A Scoping Review.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. The Impact of Access to Clinical Guidelines on LLM-Based Treatment Recommendations for Chronic Hepatitis B.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Roy H PerlisCenter for Quantitative Health and Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. rperlis@mgh.harvard.edu.
Joseph F GoldbergDepartment of Psychiatry, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Michael J OstacherDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0353-7535
Christopher D SchneckDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Harvard University · USStanford University · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

Data-driven subtyping in major depressive disorderR01MH123804 · NIMH · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI PERLIS, ROY H. · 2021 to 2024
$3.1M
Depression, Isolation, and Social Connectivity Online (DISCO)RF1MH132335 · NIMH · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI PERLIS, ROY H. · 2022 to 2022
$1.9M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH123804NIMH NIH HHS RF1 MH132335U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) R01MH123804U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) RF1MH132335
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Management of depressive episodes in bipolar disorder remains challenging for clinicians despite the availability of treatment guidelines. In other contexts, large language models have yielded promising results for supporting clinical decisionmaking. We developed 50 sets of clinical vignettes reflecting bipolar depression and presented them to experts in bipolar disorder, who were asked to identify 5 optimal next-step pharmacotherapies and 5 poor or contraindicated choices. The same vignettes were then presented to a large language model (GPT4-turbo; gpt-4-1106-preview), with or without augmentation by prompting with recent bipolar treatment guidelines, and asked to identify the optimal next-step pharmacotherapy. Overlap between model output and gold standard was estimated. The augmented model prioritized the expert-designated optimal choice for 508/1000 vignettes (50.8%, 95% CI 47.7-53.9%; Cohen's kappa = 0.31, 95% CI 0.28-0.35). For 120 vignettes (12.0%), at least one model choice was among the poor or contraindicated treatments. Results were not meaningfully different when gender or race of the vignette was permuted to examine risk for bias. By comparison, an un-augmented model identified the optimal treatment for 234 (23.0%, 95% CI 20.8-26.0%; McNemar's p < 0.001 versus augmented model) of the vignettes. A sample of community clinicians scoring the same vignettes identified the optimal choice for 23.1% (95% CI 15.7-30.5%) of vignettes, on average; McNemar's p < 0.001 versus augmented model. Large language models prompted with evidence-based guidelines represent a promising, scalable strategy for clinical decision support. In addition to prospective studies of efficacy, strategies to avoid clinician overreliance on such models, and address the possibility of bias, will be needed.

Indexed as

Bipolar DisorderAdultClinical Decision-MakingDecision Support Systems, ClinicalFemaleHumansLanguageMale

Identifiers

PMID38480911
PMCPMC11251032
OpenAlexW4392739577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.