ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Real-world performance of open-source large language models in diabetes diagnosis.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of diverse open-source large language models (LLMs) in diagnosing diabetes subtypes and comorbidities from unstructured clinical text, assessing the impact of model characteristics, prompting, and language. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 11,329 adult diabetes patients from a large Chinese tertiary center (2010-2020). Various open-source LLMs were tested using four prompting strategies in English and Chinese. Primary outcomes were F1-scores for multi-class diabetes subtyping and binary classification of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) and metabolic syndrome (MetS). Results: LLMs demonstrated high performance in complex subtyping (peak F1 0.951) but showed limitations in rule-based DKD (F1 0.570) and MetS (F1 0.650) diagnosis. Chain-of-Thought prompting improved MetS classification but degraded DKD performance. Optimal model size was approximately 32B parameters. Notably, English prompts outperformed Chinese prompts on native Chinese text. Conclusion: Open-source LLMs exhibit strong holistic pattern recognition for complex classification but struggle with rule-based procedural reasoning. These models are promising as clinical co-pilots to augment expert decision-making rather than serving as autonomous diagnostic tools.
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.