ArticleIrish journal of medical science2026
Scenario-based comparative evaluation of ChatGPT-4o and physician groups in pediatric minor head trauma.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterest in the use of ChatGPT-4o in scenario-based clinical assessment has increased substantially in recent years. However, studies evaluating ChatGPT-4o in pediatric head trauma scenarios and comparing it with different physician groups remain limited.
aimsTo evaluate the scenario-based performance of ChatGPT-4o in pediatric head trauma and compare it with that of emergency physicians, neurosurgeons, and pediatricians.
methodsThis study included 60 pediatric patients who presented between 15 December 2024 and 15 June 2025 and met the inclusion criteria. After clinical follow-up, cases were converted into multiple-choice case scenarios and classified into red, yellow, and green zones according to PECARN. These scenarios were answered by 42 physicians from emergency medicine, neurosurgery, and pediatrics (n=14 per group) and by ChatGPT-4o. Concordance of scenario-based management responses with PECARN recommendations was compared statistically.
resultsOf the 60 cases, 25.0% (n=15) were classified as red zone, 50.0% (n=30) as yellow zone, and 25.0% (n=15) as green zone. ChatGPT-4o showed lower scenario-based performance than all physician groups in red-zone cases. When non-contrast brain CT was accepted as the correct option in the yellow zone, ChatGPT-4o had the lowest overall accuracy (median: 24.50). When observation was accepted as correct, ChatGPT-4o showed the highest accuracy both in the yellow zone (median: 17.00; p=0.001) and overall (median: 35.50; p<0.001). ChatGPT-4o showed the highest accuracy in green-zone cases (median: 8.50).
conclusionChatGPT-4o did not demonstrate adequate scenario-based performance in critical pediatric head trauma cases. However, it may have potential as a supportive tool in non-critical case scenarios.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42334770What 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.