Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40369934›Full record

ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025

How do GPs Want Large Language Models to be Applied in Primary Care, and What Are Their Concerns? A Cross-Sectional Survey.

Richard C Armitage

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author.

Richard C ArmitageAcademic Unit of Population and Lifespan Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1165-6753

Funding

The author received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAlthough the potential utility of large language models (LLMs) in medicine and healthcare is substantial, no assessment has been made to date of how GPs want LLMs to be applied in primary care, or of which issues GPs are most concerned about regarding the implementation of LLMs into their clinical practice. This study's objective was to generate preliminary evidence that answers these questions, which are relevant because GPs themselves will ultimately harness the power of LLMs in primary care.

methodsNon-probability sampling was utilised: GPs practicing in the UK and who were members of one of two Facebook groups (one containing a community of UK primary care staff, the other containing a community of GMC-registered doctors in the UK) were invited to complete an online survey, which ran from 06 to 13 November 2024.

resultsThe survey received 113 responses, 107 of which were from GPs practicing in the UK. When LLM accuracy and safety were assumed to be guaranteed, broad enthusiasm for LLMs carrying out various nonclinical and clinical tasks in primary care was reported. The single nonclinical task and clinical task that respondents were most supportive of were the LLM listening to the consultation and writing notes in real-time for the GP to review, edit, and save (44.0%), and the LLM identifying outstanding clinical tasks and actioning them (51.0%), respectively. Respondents were concerned with a range of issues regarding LLMs being embedded into clinical systems, with patient safety being the most commonly reported single issue of concern (36.2%). DISCUSSION: This study has generated preliminary evidence that is of potential utility to those developing LLMs for use in primary care. Further research is required to expand this evidence base to further inform the development of these technologies, and to ensure they are acceptable to the GPs who will use them.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelGeneral PractitionersPrimary Health CareAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLarge Language ModelsMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID40369934
PMCPMC12079004

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.