ReviewWorld journal of methodology2026
Biases of large language models in diagnosing Cushing's syndrome.
Review in World journal of methodology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnosis of endogenous Cushing's syndrome (CS) can be complicated and often delayed, given its low incidence (estimated globally at 1.8 cases to 4.5 cases per million people per year) and its clinical features that mimic far more prevalent metabolic disorders, such as central obesity, hypertension, and glucose intolerance. In clinical practice, physicians rely on cognitive heuristics that are prone to error, contributing to diagnostic delays (on average around 34 months pass from symptom onset to diagnosis of CS). Large language models and machine learning algorithms could be potential decision-support tools for screening and differential diagnosis of CS. However, these systems are at risk of inheriting and even amplifying existing cognitive biases and data-driven distortions embedded in their training data. Machine learning models designed for CS could be vulnerable to methodological flaws, notably spectrum bias and the exclusion of clinically relevant demographic variables, demanding attention from the endocrine and medical informatics communities. This paper examines how cognitive and algorithmic biases intersect in diagnostic models for CS, highlighting parallels between human diagnostic heuristics (
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.