Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39148822›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024

Large Language Model Influence on Management Reasoning: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Ethan Goh, Robert Gallo, Eric Strong, Yingjie Weng, Hannah Kerman, Jason Freed, Joséphine A Cool, Zahir Kanjee, Kathleen P Lane, Andrew S Parsons and 8 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06208423 (Management Reasoning With AI Chat Bots), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT06208423 nacompletednot on this map

Management Reasoning With AI Chat Bots

TypeinterventionalSponsorStanford UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled92ConditionsClinical Decision-makingArmsGPT-4
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Ethan GohStanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.ORCID 0009-0001-7491-4257
Robert GalloCenter for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, PA, CA.
Eric StrongStanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
Yingjie WengQuantitative Sciences Unit, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
Hannah KermanBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Jason FreedBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Joséphine A CoolBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Zahir KanjeeBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Kathleen P LaneUniversity of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN.
Andrew S ParsonsUniversity of Virginia, School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA.
Neera AhujaStanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
Eric HorvitzMicrosoft, Redmond, WA.
Daniel YangKaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA.
Arnold MilsteinStanford Clinical Excellence Research Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Andrew P J OlsonUniversity of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN.
Jason HomStanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
Jonathan H ChenStanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Adam RodmanBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA.

Funding

Western States Node of the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (TMS for CUD) UG1DA015815 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Keith N. Humphreys, Philip Todd Korthuis · 2015 to 2026
$24.6M
NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA015815
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Large language model (LLM) artificial intelligence (AI) systems have shown promise in diagnostic reasoning, but their utility in management reasoning with no clear right answers is unknown. Objective: To determine whether LLM assistance improves physician performance on open-ended management reasoning tasks compared to conventional resources. Design: Prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted from 30 November 2023 to 21 April 2024. Setting: Multi-institutional study from Stanford University, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and the University of Virginia involving physicians from across the United States. Participants: 92 practicing attending physicians and residents with training in internal medicine, family medicine, or emergency medicine. Intervention: Five expert-developed clinical case vignettes were presented with multiple open-ended management questions and scoring rubrics created through a Delphi process. Physicians were randomized to use either GPT-4 via ChatGPT Plus in addition to conventional resources (e.g., UpToDate, Google), or conventional resources alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was difference in total score between groups on expert-developed scoring rubrics. Secondary outcomes included domain-specific scores and time spent per case. Results: Physicians using the LLM scored higher compared to those using conventional resources (mean difference 6.5 %, 95% CI 2.7-10.2, p<0.001). Significant improvements were seen in management decisions (6.1%, 95% CI 2.5-9.7, p=0.001), diagnostic decisions (12.1%, 95% CI 3.1-21.0, p=0.009), and case-specific (6.2%, 95% CI 2.4-9.9, p=0.002) domains. GPT-4 users spent more time per case (mean difference 119.3 seconds, 95% CI 17.4-221.2, p=0.02). There was no significant difference between GPT-4-augmented physicians and GPT-4 alone (-0.9%, 95% CI -9.0 to 7.2, p=0.8). Conclusions and Relevance: LLM assistance improved physician management reasoning compared to conventional resources, with particular gains in contextual and patient-specific decision-making. These findings indicate that LLMs can augment management decision-making in complex cases. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06208423; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT06208423.

Identifiers

PMID39148822
PMCPMC11326321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.