Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40786055›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025

Assessing the adherence of large language models to clinical practice guidelines in Chinese medicine: a content analysis.

Weilong Zhao, Honghao Lai, Bei Pan, Jiajie Huang, Danni Xia, Chunyang Bai, Jiayi Liu, Jianing Liu, Yinghui Jin, Hongcai Shang and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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. Review
  2. Review
  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

16 authors.

Weilong ZhaoDepartment of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Honghao LaiDepartment of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Bei PanEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Jiajie HuangCollege of Nursing, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, China.
Danni XiaDepartment of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Chunyang BaiSchool of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Jiayi LiuDepartment of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Jianing LiuCollege of Nursing, Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, China.
Yinghui JinCenter for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Hongcai ShangKey Laboratory of Chinese Internal Medicine of Ministry of Education and Dongfang Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jianping LiuEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Nannan ShiInstitute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Jie LiuDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Yaolong ChenResearch Unit of Evidence-Based Evaluation and Guidelines (2021RU017), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Janne EstillEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Long GeDepartment of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Whether large language models (LLMs) can effectively facilitate CM knowledge acquisition remains uncertain. This study aims to assess the adherence of LLMs to Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) in CM. Methods: This cross-sectional study randomly selected ten CPGs in CM and constructed 150 questions across three categories: medication based on differential diagnosis (MDD), specific prescription consultation (SPC), and CM theory analysis (CTA). Eight LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude-3.5 Sonnet, Moonshot-v1, ChatGLM-4, DeepSeek-v3, DeepSeek-r1, Claude-4 sonnet, and Claude-4 sonnet thinking) were evaluated using both English and Chinese queries. The main evaluation metrics included accuracy, readability, and use of safety disclaimers. Results: Overall, DeepSeek-v3 and DeepSeek-r1 demonstrated superior performance in both English (median 5.00, interquartile range (IQR) 4.00-5.00 vs. median 5.00, IQR 3.70-5.00) and Chinese (both median 5.00, IQR 4.30-5.00), significantly outperforming all other models. All models achieved significantly higher accuracy in Chinese versus English responses (all p < 0.05). Significant variations in accuracy were observed across the categories of questions, with MDD and SPC questions presenting more challenges than CTA questions. English responses had lower readability (mean flesch reading ease score 32.7) compared to Chinese responses. Moonshot-v1 provided the highest rate of safety disclaimers (98.7% English, 100% Chinese). Conclusion: LLMs showed varying degrees of potential for acquiring CM knowledge. The performance of DeepSeek-v3 and DeepSeek-r1 is satisfactory. Optimizing LLMs to become effective tools for disseminating CM information is an important direction for future development.

Indexed as

Chinese medicineclinical practice guidelinecomparisonknowledge acquisitionlarge language model

Identifiers

PMID40786055
PMCPMC12331602

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.