ArticleESMO real world data and digital oncology2024
Superhuman performance on urology board questions using an explainable language model enhanced with European Association of Urology guidelines.
Article in ESMO real world data and digital oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in urological education: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- [Artificial intelligence as decision support tool in urological oncology: current evidence and challenges].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Pooled it
- Performance of ChatGPT, Claude, and AMBOSS on the European Board of Urology In-Service Assessment and Alignment With the European Association of Urology 2025 Guidelines: Comparative Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Online Andrology: Real-World Status Quo of Patients' Online Information Sources and Comparison With Large Language Models in Germany.Andrology · 2026Article
- Evaluation Methods for Inference-Time Retrieval-Augmented and Graph Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models in Health Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Accuracy, readability, and understandability of EAU guidelines bot for testicular cancer.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Transforming Urological Care With Artificial Intelligence Chatbots: From Digital Assistants to Clinical Partners.International neurourology journal · 2026Review
- Evaluating interactions of patients with large language models for medical information.BJU international · 2025Article
- Evaluating AI proficiency in nuclear cardiology: Large language models take on the board preparation exam.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2025Article
- Comparing Patient's Confidence in Clinical Capabilities in Urology: Large Language Models Versus Urologists.European urology open science · 2024Article
- Large language model use in clinical oncology.NPJ precision oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Large language models encode clinical knowledge and can answer medical expert questions out-of-the-box without further training. However, this zero-shot performance is limited by outdated training data and lack of explainability impeding clinical translation. We aimed to develop a urology-specialized chatbot (UroBot) and evaluate it against state-of-the-art models as well as historical urologists' performance in answering urological board questions in a fully clinician-verifiable manner. Materials and methods: We developed UroBot, a software pipeline based on the GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o models by OpenAI, utilizing retrieval augmented generation and the 2023 European Association of Urology guidelines. UroBot was benchmarked against the zero-shot performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, GPT-4o, and Uro_Chat. The evaluation involved 10 runs with 200 European Board of Urology in-service assessment questions, with the performance measured by the mean rate of correct answers (RoCA). Results: UroBot-4o achieved the highest RoCA, with an average of 88.4%, outperforming GPT-4o (77.6%) by 10.8%. Besides, it is clinician-verifiable and demonstrated the highest level of agreement between runs as measured by Fleiss' kappa (κ = 0.979). In comparison, the average performance of urologists on urological board questions is 68.7% as reported by the literature. Conclusions: UroBot is a clinician-verifiable and accurate software pipeline and outperforms published models and urologists in answering urology board questions. We provide code and instructions to use and extend UroBot for further development.
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.