ReviewJournal of medical systems2024
Applications and Future Prospects of Medical LLMs: A Survey Based on the M-KAT Conceptual Framework.
Review in Journal of medical systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation Frameworks for Clinical Foundation Models in Specific Tasks of Unstructured Medical Text Analysis: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparison of the performance of large language models in answering patient questions related to cataract.iScience · 2026Article
- Performance evaluation of large language models in the diagnosis of emergency internal medicine diseases: a retrospective study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Temporal evolution of large language models (LLMs) in oncology.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Large language model-driven agents in nursing practice: A scoping review.International journal of nursing sciences · 2025Review
- Critical Limitations in Systematic Reviews of Large Language Models in Health Care.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Evaluating and Improving Syndrome Differentiation Thinking Ability in Large Language Models: Method Development Study.JMIR medical informatics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The success of large language models (LLMs) in general areas have sparked a wave of research into their applications in the medical field. However, enhancing the medical professionalism of these models remains a major challenge. This study proposed a novel model training theoretical framework, the M-KAT framework, which integrated domain-specific training methods for LLMs with the unique characteristics of the medical discipline. This framework aimed to improve the medical professionalism of the models from three perspectives: general knowledge acquisition, specialized skill development, and alignment with clinical thinking. This study summarized the outcomes of medical LLMs across four tasks: clinical diagnosis and treatment, medical question answering, medical research, and health management. Using the M-KAT framework, we analyzed the contribution to enhancement of professionalism of models through different training stages. At the same time, for some of the potential risks associated with medical LLMs, targeted solutions can be achieved through pre-training, SFT, and model alignment based on cultivated professional capabilities. Additionally, this study identified main directions for future research on medical LLMs: advancing professional evaluation datasets and metrics tailored to the needs of medical tasks, conducting in-depth studies on medical multimodal large language models (MLLMs) capable of integrating diverse data types, and exploring the forms of medical agents and multi-agent frameworks that can interact with real healthcare environments and support clinical decision-making. It is hoped that predictions of work can provide a reference for subsequent research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39725770What 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.