ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026
The role of large language models in the diagnosis and management of obstetric patients: a pilot feasibility study using simulated obstetric cases.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis feasibility study aimed to assess the potential of freely available large language models (LLMs) to support clinical decision-making in obstetrics.
methodsFive fictional obstetric patient cases, encompassing a range of clinical presentations (preeclampsia, fetal growth restriction, preterm premature rupture of membranes, vaginal bleeding, and abdominal trauma), were presented to three LLMs: Chat-GPT (OpenAI), Gemini (Google), and DeepSeek. The LLMs were tasked with evaluating the patient information, suggesting potential diagnoses, and outlining appropriate management strategies. The responses were qualitatively assessed, and subsequently, four expert obstetricians evaluated the LLMs' recommendations using the Global Quality Score (GQS).
resultsThe LLMs demonstrated an ability to process complex obstetric scenarios and generate diagnostic and management considerations that often aligned with established clinical principles. In cases like preeclampsia and preterm premature rupture of membranes, the LLMs accurately identified key issues and proposed relevant management steps. For fetal growth restriction, vaginal bleeding, and abdominal trauma, they outlined appropriate evaluation frameworks and differential diagnoses. The responses varied in their level of detail and directness. DeepSeek received the highest GQS for all five cases in total, whereas Google Gemini was outperformed by the two other LLMs in the cases of vaginal bleeding and abdominal trauma.
conclusionThis preliminary feasibility assessment suggests that freely available LLMs can generate plausible-sounding responses to obstetric vignettes. Further rigorous evaluation using quantitative methods, real-world data, and exploration of integration strategies is warranted to fully understand their role in enhancing clinical decision-making and improving patient care in obstetric practice.
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.