ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Evaluation of large language models in percutaneous coronary intervention decision-making.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical decision-making for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with moderate-to-severe coronary stenosis is complex and sensitive to data completeness and guideline interpretation. We aimed to evaluate large language models (LLMs) for PCI support and to develop an ensemble framework for this complex decision setting. Methods: In this retrospective study, 15 LLM versions were evaluated using data of 93 patients from Ruijin Hospital. A hierarchical framework was employed to assess performance across varying data inputs. To optimize accuracy, advanced grouped ensemble strategies were developed and validated via nested repeated stratified 5-fold cross-validation. Probabilistic reliability and clinical utility were quantified through calibration plots and Decision Curve Analysis (DCA). Statistical robustness was ensured by bootstrap ROC-AUC comparisons with Holm-Bonferroni adjustment and restricted cubic spline modeling to analyze age-performance interactions. Results: Distinct behavioral patterns emerged across LLM families: Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct made more aggressive recommendations, whereas Grok-3 was more conservative. Holm-adjusted analysis identified significant performance gaps at age cut-points of 73, 75, and 76. A significant age-score interaction (LRT Conclusion: Tailored LLM ensembles are feasible for PCI decision support and can improve robustness. Further multicenter prospective validation and multimodal integration are needed before clinical deployment.
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.