Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40712151›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Harm Reduction Strategies for Thoughtful Use of Large Language Models in the Medical Domain: Perspectives for Patients and Clinicians.

Birger Moëll, Fredrik Sand Aronsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. "MELMA" in otolaryngology: Medical evaluation of large language model answers. Clinician-rated scoring (MELMA-Q) and web-based auditing (MELMA-W) novel tools for AI assessment.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 · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Birger Moëll *Division of Speech, Music and Hearing, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Lindstedsvägen 24, Stockholm, 114 28, Sweden, 46 704851893.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6529-1211
Fredrik Sand Aronsson *Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Division of Speech and Language Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8452-0043

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlabelled: The integration of large language models (LLMs) into health care presents significant risks to patients and clinicians, inadequately addressed by current guidance. This paper adapts harm reduction principles from public health to medical LLMs, proposing a structured framework for mitigating these domain-specific risks while maximizing ethical utility. We outline tailored strategies for patients, emphasizing critical health literacy and output verification, and for clinicians, enforcing "human-in-the-loop" validation and bias-aware workflows. Key innovations include developing thoughtful use protocols that position LLMs as assistive tools requiring mandatory verification, establishing actionable institutional policies with risk-stratified deployment guidelines and patient disclaimers, and critically analyzing underaddressed regulatory, equity, and safety challenges. This research moves beyond theory to offer a practical roadmap, enabling stakeholders to ethically harness LLMs, balance innovation with accountability, and preserve core medical values: patient safety, equity, and trust in high-stakes health care settings.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionLanguageHealth LiteracyHumansLarge Language ModelsPatient Safetyartificial intelligenceassistive technologybias awarenessconversational AIgovernance frameworkshealth care innovationhuman-in-the-loopregulatory compliancerisk mitigationtrustworthinessverification protocols

Identifiers

PMID40712151
PMCPMC12296254

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.