ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
Evaluating large language models in pediatric fever management: a two-layer study.
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. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pediatric fever is a prevalent concern, often causing parental anxiety and frequent medical consultations. While large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, Perplexity, and YouChat show promise in enhancing medical communication and education, their efficacy in addressing complex pediatric fever-related questions remains underexplored, particularly from the perspectives of medical professionals and patients' relatives. Objective: This study aimed to explore the differences and similarities among four common large language models (ChatGPT3.5, ChatGPT4.0, YouChat, and Perplexity) in answering thirty pediatric fever-related questions and to examine how doctors and pediatric patients' relatives evaluate the LLM-generated answers based on predefined criteria. Methods: The study selected thirty fever-related pediatric questions answered by the four models. Twenty doctors rated these responses across four dimensions. To conduct the survey among pediatric patients' relatives, we eliminated certain responses that we deemed to pose safety risks or be misleading. Based on the doctors' questionnaire, the thirty questions were divided into six groups, each evaluated by twenty pediatric relatives. The Tukey Results: In the doctors' questionnaire, ChatGPT3.5 and ChatGPT4.0 outperformed YouChat and Perplexity in all dimensions, with no significant difference between ChatGPT3.5 and ChatGPT4.0 or between YouChat and Perplexity. All models scored significantly better in accuracy than other dimensions. In the pediatric relatives' questionnaire, no significant differences were found among the models, with revisits revealing some reasons for these results. Conclusions: Internet searches (YouChat and Perplexity) did not improve the ability of large language models to answer medical questions as expected. Patients lacked the ability to understand and analyze model responses due to a lack of professional knowledge and a lack of central points in model answers. When developing large language models for patient use, it's important to highlight the central points of the answers and ensure they are easily understandable.
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.