ArticleJMIR formative research2024
Benchmarking Large Language Models for Cervical Spondylosis.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Large Language Models' Responses to Spinal Cord Injury: A Comparative Study of Performance.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical spondylosis is the most common degenerative spinal disorder in modern societies. Patients require a great deal of medical knowledge, and large language models (LLMs) offer patients a novel and convenient tool for accessing medical advice. In this study, we collected the most frequently asked questions by patients with cervical spondylosis in clinical work and internet consultations. The accuracy of the answers provided by LLMs was evaluated and graded by 3 experienced spinal surgeons. Comparative analysis of responses showed that all LLMs could provide satisfactory results, and that among them, GPT-4 had the highest accuracy rate. Variation across each section in all LLMs revealed their ability boundaries and the development direction of artificial intelligence.
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.