Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42042855›Full record

ArticleCritical care explorations2026

Real-Time Evaluation of a Large Language Model for Clinical Practice Guideline Development.

Brian L Erstad

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care explorations, 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. Article
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

1 author.

Brian L ErstadDepartment of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Arizona R. Ken Coit College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ.ORCID 0000-0001-8909-9921

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the capability of a large language model (LLM) for performing each of the steps of clinical practice guideline development from framing a healthcare question to creating the evidence-to-decision framework.

methodsThe LLM tool used for this study was OpenAI Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT)-4o. This evaluation of an LLM was conducted concomitantly with development of a clinical practice guideline on neuromuscular blockade in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome for the Society of Critical Care Medicine. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) handbook provided the steps of the process that served as the outline for this evaluation of GPT-4o. Each request for information posed to the LLM was performed during or soon after the same period as the respective step of the process being conducted by the guideline panel. The results follow the major sections of the GRADE process: framing the healthcare question and selecting and rating the importance of outcomes, summarizing the evidence and quality of evidence, and going from evidence to recommendations. RESULTS AND

conclusionsThe LLM demonstrated the most usefulness for the initial step of the guideline development process that involved framing the healthcare question and selecting and rating outcomes. The limitations of the LLM became most apparent during the remaining steps of the development process.

Indexed as

Critical CareLarge Language ModelsPractice Guidelines as TopicEvidence-Based MedicineGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansNeuromuscular Blockadeartificial intelligenceguidelinelarge language modelsneuromuscular blockadeneuromuscular blocking agentspractice guideline

Identifiers

PMID42042855
PMCPMC13120502

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.