ArticleNeurospine2024
Performance of a Large Language Model in the Generation of Clinical Guidelines for Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Spine Surgery.
Article in Neurospine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large language models in the vertical integration of spine surgery workflow: a scoping review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Review
- Exploring large language models as a prescription decision support tool for rational antibiotic use: A dual-framework analysis using standardized examinations and real-world clinical cases.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Guideline-augmented large language models for contraindication screening in interventional spine care.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
- Large Language Models in Spine Surgery : A Narrative Review of Performance Paradox and Clinical Integration Challenges.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2026Article
- Large language models in spine care and research.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Review
- Performance of DeepSeek-R1 and ChatGPT-5 in the Generation of North American Spine Society Clinical Guidelines for Adult Vertebral Compression Fractures: Comparative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Medical large language models and systems in the clinical application of spinal diseases: Current status, challenges, and future prospects.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026Review
- Assessing the ability of large language models to simplify lumbar spine imaging reports into patient-facing text: a pilot study of GPT-4.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Patient Version of Guideline for Fibromyalgia (2025 Edition).Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2025Article
- Role of artificial intelligence in ICU therapeutic decision-making for severe infections.Current opinion in critical care · 2025Review
- Revolutionizing spine surgery with emerging AI-FEA integration.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Current trends and future prospects of language models and processing systems in spine surgery - a scoping review.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Systematic Review on Large Language Models in Orthopaedic Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Large Language Models in Spine Surgery: A Promising Technology.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2025Review
- Assessing LLMs on IDSA Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Native Vertebral Osteomyelitis: A Comparison Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Can generative artificial intelligence provide accurate medical advice?: a case of ChatGPT versus Congress of Neurological Surgeons management of acute cervical spine and spinal cord injuries clinical guidelines.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Assessment of ChatGPT's adherence to evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for plantar fasciitis management.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Antibiotics and Artificial Intelligence: Clinical Considerations on a Rapidly Evolving Landscape.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2025Article
- Advantages and limitations of large language models for antibiotic prescribing and antimicrobial stewardship.npj antimicrobials and resistance · 2025Review
- Performance of ChatGPT in Pediatric Audiology as Rated by Students and Experts.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveLarge language models, such as chat generative pre-trained transformer (ChatGPT), have great potential for streamlining medical processes and assisting physicians in clinical decision-making. This study aimed to assess the potential of ChatGPT's 2 models (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.0) to support clinical decision-making by comparing its responses for antibiotic prophylaxis in spine surgery to accepted clinical guidelines.
methodsChatGPT models were prompted with questions from the North American Spine Society (NASS) Evidence-based Clinical Guidelines for Multidisciplinary Spine Care for Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Spine Surgery (2013). Its responses were then compared and assessed for accuracy.
resultsOf the 16 NASS guideline questions concerning antibiotic prophylaxis, 10 responses (62.5%) were accurate in ChatGPT's GPT-3.5 model and 13 (81%) were accurate in GPT-4.0. Twenty-five percent of GPT-3.5 answers were deemed as overly confident while 62.5% of GPT-4.0 answers directly used the NASS guideline as evidence for its response.
conclusionChatGPT demonstrated an impressive ability to accurately answer clinical questions. GPT-3.5 model's performance was limited by its tendency to give overly confident responses and its inability to identify the most significant elements in its responses. GPT-4.0 model's responses had higher accuracy and cited the NASS guideline as direct evidence many times. While GPT-4.0 is still far from perfect, it has shown an exceptional ability to extract the most relevant research available compared to GPT-3.5. Thus, while ChatGPT has shown far-reaching potential, scrutiny should still be exercised regarding its clinical use at this time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.