Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39541580›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

Economics and Equity of Large Language Models: Health Care Perspective.

Radha Nagarajan, Midori Kondo, Franz Salas, Emre Sezgin, Yuan Yao, Vanessa Klotzman, Sandip A Godambe, Naqi Khan, Alfonso Limon, Graham Stephenson and 15 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Applications of Chatbots in Improving Patient Care Outcomes:Sultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

25 authors.

Radha NagarajanChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0002-3423-6874
Midori KondoFred Hutch Patient Care, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0009-0006-0557-7652
Franz SalasAmazon Web Services, Detroit, MI, United States.ORCID 0009-0007-2260-5405
Emre SezginNationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8798-9605
Yuan YaoAmazon Web Services, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0005-4896-4786
Vanessa KlotzmanUniversity of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9834-1927
Sandip A GodambeChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9033-4159
Naqi KhanAmazon Web Services, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9628-3049
Alfonso LimonChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3654-8353
Graham StephensonUniversity of California Irvine Health, Irvine, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6135-541X
Sharief TaramanCognoa LLC, Palo Alto, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2108-2490
Nephi WaltonNational Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9095-7265
Louis EhwerhemuephaChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1369-7954
Jay PanditScripps Research Translational Institute, La Jolla, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0119-0881
Deepti PanditaUniversity of California Irvine Health, Irvine, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0007-2791-2738
Michael WeissChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6580-8532
Charles GoldenChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0002-3281-0254
Adam GoldChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0001-7083-4364
John HendersonChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0001-0739-639X
Angela ShippyAmazon Web Services, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID 0009-0006-4976-2331
Leo Anthony CeliMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6712-6626
William R HoganMedical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9881-1017
Eric K OermannNYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1876-5963
Terence SangerChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1837-6044
Steven MartelChildren's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0008-5564-3827

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) continue to exhibit noteworthy capabilities across a spectrum of areas, including emerging proficiencies across the health care continuum. Successful LLM implementation and adoption depend on digital readiness, modern infrastructure, a trained workforce, privacy, and an ethical regulatory landscape. These factors can vary significantly across health care ecosystems, dictating the choice of a particular LLM implementation pathway. This perspective discusses 3 LLM implementation pathways-training from scratch pathway (TSP), fine-tuned pathway (FTP), and out-of-the-box pathway (OBP)-as potential onboarding points for health systems while facilitating equitable adoption. The choice of a particular pathway is governed by needs as well as affordability. Therefore, the risks, benefits, and economics of these pathways across 4 major cloud service providers (Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and Oracle) are presented. While cost comparisons, such as on-demand and spot pricing across the cloud service providers for the 3 pathways, are presented for completeness, the usefulness of managed services and cloud enterprise tools is elucidated. Managed services can complement the traditional workforce and expertise, while enterprise tools, such as federated learning, can overcome sample size challenges when implementing LLMs using health care data. Of the 3 pathways, TSP is expected to be the most resource-intensive regarding infrastructure and workforce while providing maximum customization, enhanced transparency, and performance. Because TSP trains the LLM using enterprise health care data, it is expected to harness the digital signatures of the population served by the health care system with the potential to impact outcomes. The use of pretrained models in FTP is a limitation. It may impact its performance because the training data used in the pretrained model may have hidden bias and may not necessarily be health care-related. However, FTP provides a balance between customization, cost, and performance. While OBP can be rapidly deployed, it provides minimal customization and transparency without guaranteeing long-term availability. OBP may also present challenges in interfacing seamlessly with downstream applications in health care settings with variations in pricing and use over time. Lack of customization in OBP can significantly limit its ability to impact outcomes. Finally, potential applications of LLMs in health care, including conversational artificial intelligence, chatbots, summarization, and machine translation, are highlighted. While the 3 implementation pathways discussed in this perspective have the potential to facilitate equitable adoption and democratization of LLMs, transitions between them may be necessary as the needs of health systems evolve. Understanding the economics and trade-offs of these onboarding pathways can guide their strategic adoption and demonstrate value while impacting health care outcomes favorably.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHumansLanguagecloudcloud service providersdemocratizationeconomicsequityhealth carehealth outcomeimplementationlarge language modelLLM

Identifiers

PMID39541580
PMCPMC11605263

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.