ArticleCureus2024
Evaluation of ChatGPT-4's Performance in Therapeutic Decision-Making During Multidisciplinary Oncology Meetings for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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 · 2025Pooled it
- Therapeutic Decisions in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: ChatGPT-4.0 Compared to Medical Expertise.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence as a Decision-Support Tool in Urological Tumor Boards: A Study in Real Clinical Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning for chemotherapy decision-making in breast cancer using large language model.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Feeding intelligence: comparative evaluation of ChatGPT and clinical guidelines for nutritional management in head and neck cancer.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Chat GPT Performance in Multi-Disciplinary Boards-Should AI Be a Member of Cancer Boards?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence (ChatGPT-4o) in Supporting Tumor Board Decisions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Assistive, not autonomous: Generative artificial intelligence in head and neck cancer care - A scoping review.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives First reports suggest that artificial intelligence (AI) such as ChatGPT-4 (Open AI, ChatGPT-4, San Francisco, USA) might represent reliable tools for therapeutic decisions in some medical conditions. This study aims to assess the decisional capacity of ChatGPT-4 in patients with head and neck carcinomas, using the multidisciplinary oncology meeting (MOM) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) decision as references. Methods This retrospective study included 263 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx who were followed at our institution between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021. The recommendation of GPT4 for the first- and second-line treatments was compared to the MOM decision and NCCN guidelines. The degrees of agreement were calculated using the Kappa method, which measures the degree of agreement between two evaluators. Results ChatGPT-4 demonstrated a moderate agreement in first-line treatment recommendations (Kappa = 0.48) and a substantial agreement (Kappa = 0.78) in second-line treatment recommendations compared to the decisions from MOM. A substantial agreement with the NCCN guidelines for both first- and second-line treatments was observed (Kappa = 0.72 and 0.66, respectively). The degree of agreement decreased when the decision included gastrostomy, patients over 70, and those with comorbidities. Conclusions The study illustrates that while ChatGPT-4 can significantly support clinical decision-making in oncology by aligning closely with expert recommendations and established guidelines, ongoing enhancements and training are crucial. The findings advocate for the continued evolution of AI tools to better handle the nuanced aspects of patient health profiles, thus broadening their applicability and reliability in clinical practice.
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.