Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38739445›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

Potential of Large Language Models in Health Care: Delphi Study.

Kerstin Denecke, Richard May, LLMHealthGroup, Octavio Rivera Romero

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Vocal Cord Dysfunction: Evaluating the Utility of AI Large Language Models for Patient Education.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Kerstin DeneckeBern University of Applied Sciences, Biel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6691-396X
Richard MayHarz University of Applied Sciences, Wernigerode, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7186-404X
LLMHealthGroupsee Acknowledgments, .
Octavio Rivera RomeroInstituto de Ingeniería Informática (I3US), Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7212-9805

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA large language model (LLM) is a machine learning model inferred from text data that captures subtle patterns of language use in context. Modern LLMs are based on neural network architectures that incorporate transformer methods. They allow the model to relate words together through attention to multiple words in a text sequence. LLMs have been shown to be highly effective for a range of tasks in natural language processing (NLP), including classification and information extraction tasks and generative applications.

objectiveThe aim of this adapted Delphi study was to collect researchers' opinions on how LLMs might influence health care and on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of LLM use in health care.

methodsWe invited researchers in the fields of health informatics, nursing informatics, and medical NLP to share their opinions on LLM use in health care. We started the first round with open questions based on our strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats framework. In the second and third round, the participants scored these items.

resultsThe first, second, and third rounds had 28, 23, and 21 participants, respectively. Almost all participants (26/28, 93% in round 1 and 20/21, 95% in round 3) were affiliated with academic institutions. Agreement was reached on 103 items related to use cases, benefits, risks, reliability, adoption aspects, and the future of LLMs in health care. Participants offered several use cases, including supporting clinical tasks, documentation tasks, and medical research and education, and agreed that LLM-based systems will act as health assistants for patient education. The agreed-upon benefits included increased efficiency in data handling and extraction, improved automation of processes, improved quality of health care services and overall health outcomes, provision of personalized care, accelerated diagnosis and treatment processes, and improved interaction between patients and health care professionals. In total, 5 risks to health care in general were identified: cybersecurity breaches, the potential for patient misinformation, ethical concerns, the likelihood of biased decision-making, and the risk associated with inaccurate communication. Overconfidence in LLM-based systems was recognized as a risk to the medical profession. The 6 agreed-upon privacy risks included the use of unregulated cloud services that compromise data security, exposure of sensitive patient data, breaches of confidentiality, fraudulent use of information, vulnerabilities in data storage and communication, and inappropriate access or use of patient data.

conclusionsFuture research related to LLMs should not only focus on testing their possibilities for NLP-related tasks but also consider the workflows the models could contribute to and the requirements regarding quality, integration, and regulations needed for successful implementation in practice.

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueNatural Language ProcessingDelivery of Health CareHumansMachine LearningMedical Informaticsartificial intelligenceattitudeattitudesDelphiDelphi studyexperienceexperiencesfuturehealth careimplementationinformaticsinnovationinterviewinterviewslanguage modellarge language modelsLLMsnatural language processingNLPopinionperceptionperceptionsperspectiveperspectives

Identifiers

PMID38739445
PMCPMC11130776

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.