Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40666107›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Diagnostic efficacy of large language models in the pediatric emergency department: a pilot study.

Francesco Del Monte, Roberta Barolo, Maria Circhetta, Angelo Giovanni Delmonaco, Emanuele Castagno, Emanuele Pivetta, Letizia Bergamasco, Matteo Franco, Gabriella Olmo, Claudia Bondone

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Comparative evaluation of ChatGPT and Gemini in detecting external apical root resorption on panoramic radiographs of orthodontic patients : Artificial intelligence performance in detecting root resorption.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Francesco Del Monte *Department of Pediatric Emergency, Regina Margherita Children's Hospital-A.O.U. Città Della Salute e Della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Roberta Barolo *Department of Public Health and Pediatrics, Postgraduate School of Pediatrics, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Maria CirchettaDepartment of Control and Computer Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Angelo Giovanni DelmonacoDepartment of Pediatric Emergency, Regina Margherita Children's Hospital-A.O.U. Città Della Salute e Della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Emanuele CastagnoDepartment of Pediatric Emergency, Regina Margherita Children's Hospital-A.O.U. Città Della Salute e Della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Emanuele PivettaDivision of Emergency Medicine and High Dependency Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, Città Della Salute e Della Scienza di Torino and University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Letizia BergamascoDepartment of Control and Computer Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Matteo FrancoDepartment of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy.
Gabriella OlmoDepartment of Control and Computer Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Claudia BondoneDepartment of Pediatric Emergency, Regina Margherita Children's Hospital-A.O.U. Città Della Salute e Della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Pediatric Emergency Department (PED) faces significant challenges, such as high patient volumes, time-sensitive decisions, and complex diagnoses. Large Language Models (LLMs) have the potential to enhance patient care; however, their effectiveness in supporting the diagnostic process remains uncertain, with studies showing mixed results regarding their impact on clinical reasoning. We aimed to assess LLM-based chatbots performance in realistic PED scenarios, and to explore their use as diagnosis-making assistants in pediatric emergency. Methods: We evaluated the diagnostic effectiveness of 5 LLMs (ChatGPT-4o, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemini 1.5 Flash, Llama-3-8B, and ChatGPT-4o mini) compared to 23 physicians (including 10 PED physicians, 6 PED residents, and 7 Emergency Medicine residents). Both LLMs and physicians had to provide one primary diagnosis and two differential diagnoses for 80 real-practice pediatric clinical cases from the PED of a tertiary care Children's Hospital, with three different levels of diagnostic complexity. The responses from both LLMs and physicians were compared to the final diagnoses assigned upon patient discharge; two independent experts evaluated the answers using a five-level accuracy scale. Each physician or LLM received a total score out of 80, based on the sum of all answer points. Results: The best performing chatbots were ChatGPT-4o (score: 72.5) and Gemini 1.5 Pro (score: 62.75), the first performing better ( Discussion: ChatGPT-4o and Gemini 1.5 Pro could be a valid tool for ED physicians, supporting clinical decision-making without replacing the physician's judgment. Shared protocols for effective collaboration between AI chatbots and healthcare professionals are needed.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencechatbotdiagnostic accuracylarge language modelpediatric emergency department

Identifiers

PMID40666107
PMCPMC12259579

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.