Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39660298›Full record

ArticleAEM education and training2024

ChatG-PD? Comparing large language model artificial intelligence and faculty rankings of the competitiveness of standardized letters of evaluation.

Benjamin Schnapp, Morgan Sehdev, Caitlin Schrepel, Sharon Bord, Alexis Pelletier-Bui, Al'ai Alvarez, Nicole M Dubosh, Yoon Soo Park, Eric Shappell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AEM education and training, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

9 authors.

Benjamin SchnappBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison Wisconsin USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5031-8269
Morgan SehdevHarvard-Affiliated Emergency Medicine Residency Brigham and Women's Hospital/Massachusetts General Hospital Boston Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2981-0512
Caitlin SchrepelDepartment of Emergency Medicine University of Washington Seattle Washington USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0204-7657
Sharon BordDepartment of Emergency Medicine The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5987-4139
Alexis Pelletier-BuiDepartment of Emergency Medicine Cooper Medical School of Rowan University Camden New Jersey USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9969-4123
Al'ai AlvarezDepartment of Emergency Medicine Stanford University Palo Alto California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5438-2476
Nicole M DuboshDepartment of Emergency Medicine Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8674-5334
Yoon Soo ParkDepartment of Medical Education University of Illinois at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA.
Eric ShappellDepartment of Emergency Medicine Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0281-3219

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: While faculty have previously been shown to have high levels of agreement about the competitiveness of emergency medicine (EM) standardized letters of evaluation (SLOEs), reviewing SLOEs remains a highly time-intensive process for faculty. Artificial intelligence large language models (LLMs) have shown promise for effectively analyzing large volumes of data across a variety of contexts, but their ability to interpret SLOEs is unknown. Objective: The objective was to evaluate the ability of LLMs to rate EM SLOEs on competitiveness compared to faculty consensus and previously developed algorithms. Methods: Fifty mock SLOE letters were drafted and analyzed seven times by a data-focused LLM with instructions to rank them based on desirability for residency. The LLM was also asked to use its own criteria to decide which characteristics are most important for residency and revise its ranking of the SLOEs. LLM-generated rank lists were compared with faculty consensus rankings. Results: There was a high degree of correlation ( Conclusions: The LLM generated rankings showed strong correlation with expert faculty consensus rankings with minimal input of faculty time and effort.

Identifiers

PMID39660298
PMCPMC11628426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.