ArticleMedicine2026
Performance of 3 large language models in detecting urinary formed elements.
Article in 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of large language models (LLMs) into medical laboratories has gained significant attention, especially in the field of image recognition. However, research on their ability to identify unstained images, such as those of urinary formed elements, remains scarce. This study assesses the image recognition capabilities of 3 LLMs, ChatGPT-4o, Deepseek Janus Pro7B and Google Gemini, in detecting urinary formed elements. This cross-sectional study analyzed 45 urine morphology images, utilizing a standardized prompt to guide ChatGPT-4o, Deepseek Janus Pro7B and Google Gemini in recognizing urine formed elements. Each image was independently evaluated 3 times, and the results were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. The accuracy and consistency of the models were compared through the Friedman test, Kendall W score, and the Mann-Whitney U test. Gemini Advanced demonstrated superior performance with a 31% accuracy rate. ChatGPT-4o (W = 0.797) and Gemini (W = 0.812) exhibited strong consistency, suggesting a superior performance compared to Deepseek (W = 0.663). Statistical analysis revealed a significant difference in performance between the 3 models, with Gemini showing superior ability to identify urinary formed elements, particularly cast and microorganism. While ChatGPT-4o, Deepseek Janus Pro7B and Google Gemini show promise and exhibit potential in identifying urinary formed elements, their diagnostic performance remains limited and are currently inadequate for clinical use in identifying urine morphology. To enhance their clinical applicability, further improvements in training data and model optimization are required. Future research should focus on enhancing these models' performance to ensure their broader utility in medical laboratories.
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.