ArticleNature and science of sleep2025
Evaluating Locally Run Large Language Models for Obstructive Sleep Apnea Diagnosis and Treatment: A Real-World Polysomnography Study.
Article in Nature and science of sleep, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Performance of nine large language models on real-world polysomnography interpretation for obstructive sleep apnea: a multi-dimensional comparative analysis.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 · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Sleep medicine is a highly resource-intensive field where large language models (LLMs) could offer a promising solution by supporting diagnostic processes. As web-based LLMs have obvious data protection constraints, locally run LLMs are essential for clinical implementation. This study is the first to investigate the performance of locally run LLMs in the interpretation of real-world polysomnographic (PSG) results. Methods: We randomly selected N=30 patients (18 male, 12 female, mean age 50.5 ± 11.1 years, mean body mass index 29.7 ± 5.5 kg/m², mean apnea hypopnea index 30.9 ± 23.8) from the clinical database of our sleep laboratory who underwent PSG due to clinical complaints typical of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The board-certified sleep physician's interpretations of diagnosis, suitable first-line therapy or alternative therapy were compared with those of three locally run LLMs (Gemma2, Llama3 and Mistral Nemo) assessing the level of concordance. Results: Gemma2 showed the lowest concordance of 33% (10/30 patients) with the board-certified sleep physician regarding OSA severity, followed by Mistral Nemo at 47% (14/30 patients) and Llama3 at 50% (15/30 patients). For automatic positive airway pressure (aPAP) recommendations, Mistral Nemo showed the highest concordance at 90% (27/30 patients), followed by Gemma2 and Llama3 with 83% (25/30 patients) each. Conclusion: Although locally run LLMs bypass data security constraints and show promising potential for clinical practice, their performance needs significant improvement prior to real-world implementation. Therefore, at present, the routine implementation of locally run LLMs in sleep medicine needs more refinement and fine tuning before they can be used for interpretation of real-world PSG results.
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.