ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Digitally Assisted Clinical Decision-Making in Traditional Chinese Medicine: Comparative Study of 5 Large Language Models.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. 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.
- Beyond transparency: why Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) need explainable artificial intelligence (XAI).Chinese medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) clinical decision-making involves complex integration of syndrome differentiation, constitutional assessment, and individualized treatment selection, creating challenges for standardization and quality assurance. While large language models (LLMs) demonstrate capabilities in medical knowledge integration and clinical reasoning, their application to TCM remains largely unexplored, particularly regarding syndrome differentiation principles and prescription formulation. Objective: This study evaluated 5 contemporary LLMs in TCM clinical decision-making and assessed human-artificial intelligence (AI) collaboration compared with independent approaches. Specific objectives were to benchmark LLM performance in TCM knowledge assessment, evaluate clinical case analysis capabilities, identify the optimal model, and assess the quality, efficiency, and acceptability of human-AI collaboration. Methods: In total, 5 mainstream LLMs were evaluated-Claude 3.7 Sonnet-Extended (Anthropic), ChatGPT 4.5 (OpenAI), Grok3-DeepSearch (xAI), Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking Experimental (Google), and DeepSeek-R1 (DeepSeek). The evaluation consisted of four phases, (1) TCM knowledge assessment using 160 standardized questions, (2) clinical case analysis of 30 cases representing different disease systems and complexity levels, (3) optimal model selection using weighted scoring (40% knowledge and 60% clinical analysis), and (4) clinical application assessment involving 10 TCM practitioners and 2 experts comparing physician-only, AI-only, and human-AI collaboration across 5 clinical cases. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, comparative testing, and regression analysis. Results: DeepSeek-R1 demonstrated superior performance across both evaluation domains, achieving 96.7% accuracy in knowledge assessment and 17.31/20 (SD 2.65) in clinical case analysis, significantly outperforming other models (P<.001). Human-AI collaboration achieved significant improvements compared with physician-only decision-making, with 16.1% quality enhancement (33.62 vs 28.97; P<.001) and 66.1% time reduction (162.6 s vs 479.2 s; P<.001). System usability was rated favorably (System Usability Scale score=76.8; P=.002), with high acceptance rates (74.25% adoption, 24% modification, and 1.75% rejection). AI assistance provided the greatest benefits in prescription formulation and medication selection (P<.001). Conclusions: LLMs, particularly DeepSeek-R1, demonstrate substantial capabilities in TCM knowledge assessment and clinical case analysis. Human-AI collaboration significantly enhanced clinical decision-making quality and efficiency while maintaining high physician acceptance. These findings provide compelling evidence for the clinical value of AI-assisted decision-making in TCM, suggesting potential solutions to current challenges in knowledge standardization, clinical training, and health care delivery efficiency. Strategic implementation of AI assistance could significantly enhance the quality, efficiency, and accessibility of TCM care while preserving fundamental principles of individualized treatment.
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.