Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41973653›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Comparing Large Language Models and Traditional Machine Translation Tools for Translating Medical Consultation Summaries: Quantitative Pilot Feasibility Study.

Andy Li, Wei Zhou, Rashina Hoda, Chris Bain, Peter Poon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Andy LiFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Room 221, Clayton Campus, 20 Exhibition Walk, Clayton, 3800, Australia, +61 3 9902 9970.ORCID 0009-0000-1990-928X
Wei ZhouFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Room 221, Clayton Campus, 20 Exhibition Walk, Clayton, 3800, Australia, +61 3 9902 9970.ORCID 0000-0002-2548-6348
Rashina HodaFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Room 221, Clayton Campus, 20 Exhibition Walk, Clayton, 3800, Australia, +61 3 9902 9970.ORCID 0000-0001-5147-8096
Chris BainFaculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Room 221, Clayton Campus, 20 Exhibition Walk, Clayton, 3800, Australia, +61 3 9902 9970.ORCID 0000-0002-5281-2364
Peter PoonFaculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Wellington Rd, Clayton VIC 3800, Monash, Australia, 61 (03) 9905 4000.ORCID 0000-0001-5175-3430

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Translation of medical consultation summaries is essential for equitable health care communication in culturally and linguistically diverse populations. While machine translation (MT) tools and large language models (LLMs) are widely accessible, their feasibility and safety for health care contexts remain underexplored. Objective: This pilot study investigates the feasibility and limitations of using LLMs and traditional MT tools to translate medical consultation summaries from English into the most common languages other than English spoken in Australia-Arabic, Chinese (simplified written form), and Vietnamese. Methods: Two simulated summaries-a simple patient-facing summary and a complex clinician-oriented interprofessional letter-were translated using 3 LLMs (GPT-4o, Llama-3.1, and Gemma-2) and 3 MT tools (Google Translate, Microsoft Bing Translator, and DeepL). Translations were benchmarked against professional third-party interpreter translations using Bilingual Evaluation Understudy, Character-level F-score, and Metric for Evaluation of Translation with Explicit Ordering metrics. Results: The translation performance varied across languages, tools, and summary complexity when assessed using automatic evaluation metrics. Traditional MT tools outperformed LLMs on surface-level metrics, while LLMs showed relative strengths in semantic similarity for Vietnamese and Chinese. Arabic translations improved with complex input, suggesting morphological advantages. The metric-based evaluation highlighted feasibility but also risks, particularly in Chinese clinical contexts. Conclusions: This pilot study provides formative evidence of opportunities and limitations in applying artificial intelligence translation for health care communication. Findings underscore the importance of human oversight; domain-specific evaluation metrics; and further formative and clinical research to guide the safe, equitable use of artificial intelligence translation tools.

Indexed as

Large Language ModelsReferral and ConsultationTranslatingAustraliaFeasibility StudiesHumansMedical InterpretingPilot ProjectsPlain Language SummariesAIartificial intelligenceconsultation summaryfeasibility studylarge language modelsmachine translationpilot evaluationresponsible AIresponsible artificial intelligencetranslation

Identifiers

PMID41973653
PMCPMC13075536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.