ArticleCureus2025
Performance of Large Language Models in Lung Cancer Clinical Decision-Making: A Comparative Analysis Based on DeepSeek, Grok, and GPT.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have reached a breakthrough in many aspects of imaging analysis and guideline mining, but not enough research has been conducted on applying them specifically to lung cancer applications. Three models were chosen, and corresponding questions that highlighted specificity towards the diagnosis of lung cancer were proposed with the goal of providing data to increase confidence and improve recommendations for transforming AI-driven clinical care for lung cancer. In this study, five clinical domains were defined. Each question was individually uploaded to the models, and responses were evaluated by three thoracic surgery experts based on accuracy, completeness, and practicality. DeepSeek-R1, Grok-3, and GPT-4.5 showed different levels of results when it came to providing clinical support for lung cancer. Regarding their responses to clinical questions, Grok-3 had a much longer average response and better performance scores. Subgroup analyses further showed that Grok-3 scored the highest of all five domains. Additionally, the confidence scores on recognizing images in the text of Grok-3 were the highest; most mistakes occurred in the differential diagnosis of special cases, whereas DeepSeek and GPT all gave preference to rarer or infectious diseases.
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.