ArticleJournal of medical systems2025
Large Language Models in Neurology Treatment Decision-Making: a Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This scoping review evaluates the expanding role of large language models (LLMs) in neurology, an area drawing growing interest of researchers and clinicians alike. A substantial existing body of literature supports the efficacy of LLMs for diagnostic applications. However, clinicians' emerging point of interest now lies in understanding the applications of LLMs in guiding treatment decisions. Our study therefore aims to synthesize and evaluate existing neurological studies focused on LLMs in treatment decision-making. A comprehensive search was conducted in the electronic databases OVID/Medline, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library through September 18th, 2024. Inclusion criteria included original studies published within the last five years focused on evaluating the efficacy of LLMs in treatment decision-making in neurology. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Y6N3E ). Four studies were identified. ChatGPT was the LLM utilized in each article, though varying in model versions. Each study demonstrated positive outcomes across varying metrics, with models generally aligning with clinician decisions. However, the lack of observed studies and variability of neurological topics limit the generalizability of these AI tools. This scoping review analyzes the existing body of evidence on LLMs in treatment decision-making in neurology. While current studies suggest potential to support clinical care, there is insufficient evidence at this stage to claim outcome improvement. Findings are not yet generalizable across neurological practice, as existing promise appears limited to narrow use cases. Prospective validation across subspecialties is needed to support broader clinical application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40956389What 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.