ArticleLearning health systems2024
Diagnostic accuracy of GPT-4 on common clinical scenarios and challenging cases.
Article in Learning health systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging the Literacy Gap in Breast Reconstruction Patient Education Using Artificial Intelligence.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- From Model to Product: Understanding and Teaching AI Evidence.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT-5 in evaluating root canal treatment and periapical pathosis on periapical radiographs.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2026Article
- Assessing AI and Neurologist Diagnostic Reasoning Against Neuropathological Ground Truth.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Elevating Management Reasoning to Preserve Professional Identity in the AI Era.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Performance of Large Language Models on Exam-style Questions and Case Challenges Across Varying Levels of Complexity.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Preparing for Pandemics with Large Language Models: An Evaluation of Sensitivity Across COVID-19, Zika, and Monkeypox Case Reports.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Independent and collaborative performance of large language models and healthcare professionals in diagnosis and triage.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Informed AI Use on Clinical Competence of General Practitioners and Internists: Pre-Post Intervention Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Evaluation of GPT-4o and Gemini Advanced on the Korean National Dental Licensing Examination: Accuracy, consistency, and question generation.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Grounded large language models for diagnostic prediction in real-world emergency department settings.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Quo Vadis, AI-Empowered Doctor?JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Dedicated AI Expert System vs Generative AI With Large Language Model for Clinical Diagnoses.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance comparison between generative AI and physicians.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Feasibility of large language models for assessing and coaching surgeons' non-technical skills.npj health systems · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of GPT-4 on common clinical scenarios and challenging cases.Learning health systems · 2024Article
- Retrospective modeling study of ChatGPT (GPT 4) warfarin dose adjustment in patients with INRs outside the therapeutic range.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Large language models (LLMs) have a high diagnostic accuracy when they evaluate previously published clinical cases. Methods: We compared the accuracy of GPT-4's differential diagnoses for previously unpublished challenging case scenarios with the diagnostic accuracy for previously published cases. Results: For a set of previously unpublished challenging clinical cases, GPT-4 achieved 61.1% correct in its top 6 diagnoses versus the previously reported 49.1% for physicians. For a set of 45 clinical vignettes of more common clinical scenarios, GPT-4 included the correct diagnosis in its top 3 diagnoses 100% of the time versus the previously reported 84.3% for physicians. Conclusions: GPT-4 performs at a level at least as good as, if not better than, that of experienced physicians on highly challenging cases in internal medicine. The extraordinary performance of GPT-4 on diagnosing common clinical scenarios could be explained in part by the fact that these cases were previously published and may have been included in the training dataset for this LLM.
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.