Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38795148›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2024

Reliability of large language models for advanced head and neck malignancies management: a comparison between ChatGPT 4 and Gemini Advanced.

Andrea Lorenzi, Giorgia Pugliese, Antonino Maniaci, Jerome R Lechien, Fabiana Allevi, Paolo Boscolo-Rizzo, Luigi Angelo Vaira, Alberto Maria Saibene

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clinical decision support using large language models in otolaryngology: a systematic review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Artificial Intelligence chatbots in oral pathology: a scoping review of applications, accuracy, and limitations.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Artificial Intelligence Models for Dysphonia Patient Education.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

8 authors.

Andrea Lorenzi *Division of Otolaryngology, Department of Surgical Sciences, Università degli Studi di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Giorgia Pugliese *Otolaryngology Unit, Santi Paolo e Carlo Hospital, Department of Health Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. giorgia.pugliese@unimi.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-6979-4206
Antonino ManiaciFaculty of Medicine and Surgery, "Kore" University of Enna, Enna, Italy.
Jerome R LechienInternational Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (YO-IFOS) Head and Neck Research Group, Paris, France.
Fabiana AlleviInternational Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (YO-IFOS) Head and Neck Research Group, Paris, France.
Paolo Boscolo-RizzoDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, Section of Otolaryngology, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy.
Luigi Angelo Vaira *International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (YO-IFOS) Head and Neck Research Group, Paris, France.
Alberto Maria Saibene *Otolaryngology Unit, Santi Paolo e Carlo Hospital, Department of Health Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study evaluates the efficacy of two advanced Large Language Models (LLMs), OpenAI's ChatGPT 4 and Google's Gemini Advanced, in providing treatment recommendations for head and neck oncology cases. The aim is to assess their utility in supporting multidisciplinary oncological evaluations and decision-making processes.

methodsThis comparative analysis examined the responses of ChatGPT 4 and Gemini Advanced to five hypothetical cases of head and neck cancer, each representing a different anatomical subsite. The responses were evaluated against the latest National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines by two blinded panels using the total disagreement score (TDS) and the artificial intelligence performance instrument (AIPI). Statistical assessments were performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Friedman test.

resultsBoth LLMs produced relevant treatment recommendations with ChatGPT 4 generally outperforming Gemini Advanced regarding adherence to guidelines and comprehensive treatment planning. ChatGPT 4 showed higher AIPI scores (median 3 [2-4]) compared to Gemini Advanced (median 2 [2-3]), indicating better overall performance. Notably, inconsistencies were observed in the management of induction chemotherapy and surgical decisions, such as neck dissection.

conclusionsWhile both LLMs demonstrated the potential to aid in the multidisciplinary management of head and neck oncology, discrepancies in certain critical areas highlight the need for further refinement. The study supports the growing role of AI in enhancing clinical decision-making but also emphasizes the necessity for continuous updates and validation against current clinical standards to integrate AI into healthcare practices fully.

Indexed as

Head and Neck NeoplasmsArtificial IntelligenceClinical Decision-MakingHumansLanguageReproducibility of ResultsArtificial intelligenceComputer-assisted diagnosisHead and neck cancerHead and neck oncologyLarge language modelsLaryngeal carcinomaNasopharyngeal carcinomaOncological diagnosisOropharyngeal carcinomaParotid carcinomaTongue carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID38795148
PMCPMC11392976

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.