ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Performance of GPT-4 for planning acupuncture treatment: comparison with human clinician performance.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The medical knowledge of GPT-4 has been evaluated on patient data, providing diagnostic and treatment suggestions. However, few studies have directly compared the clinical suggestions of GPT-4 with those of groups of practitioners. Methods: This study assessed the ability of GPT-4 to make medical decisions regarding acupuncture treatment by comparing its selection of acupoints with those made by human clinicians. Ten case reports published in Korean medical journals were selected and put in a standardized format. The standardized patient information was given to 80 Korean Medicine doctors and GPT-4 to diagnose and prescribe three to five acupoints per case. To evaluate the performance of GPT-4, the similarities in acupoint selection between the doctors and GPT-4 were quantified based on the percentage overlap and correlations of the selection probabilities of acupoints in each case. Results: The average percentage overlap for acupoints among cases at the 10% cutoff was 51.3%, i.e., more than half of the GPT-4 acupoint suggestions overlapped the acupoints selected by the doctors. In half of the cases, significant correlations were observed in the acupoint selection probabilities, implying that GPT-4 acupoint suggestions are similar to those of doctors. Conclusions: GPT-4 made reasonable acupoint suggestions, with notable overlap observed with the prescriptions of doctors. This shows its promise for supporting medical decisions, education, and personalized medicine for patients undergoing acupuncture treatment. Future studies and validation are necessary to ensure the reliability and efficacy of applying GPT-4 in real-world settings.
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.