ArticleWorld journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery2026
Disparities in AI-Based Prior Authorization for Head and Neck Reconstruction: A Large Language Model Analysis.
Article in World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Large language models (LLM) are being rapidly integrated into healthcare, particularly to streamline time- and labor-intensive administrative processes. However, the potential for artificial intelligence (AI) systems to demonstrate bias when employed for insurance authorization remains poorly understood. As insurers increasingly adopt AI to make coverage decisions, this study examined bias in LLM-driven prior authorization in otolaryngology, using oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) as a case study. Methods: Using OpenAI's generative transformer GPT-4o, this study assessed for LLM bias when simulating insurance coverage decisions for head and neck cancer reconstruction. A standardized clinical scenario was constructed involving patients with T2N2 oral cavity SCC, all requiring surgical resection and reconstruction. The LLM was prompted to choose between a radial forearm free flap (RFFF) and split-thickness skin graft (STSG) for reconstruction, across 19,900 simulations. Patient profiles were systematically varied by age, sex, race/ethnicity, zip code-based income level, socioeconomic status (SES), and substance use history. Results: The LLM output showed significant disparities in approval decisions. RFFF was more frequently approved for younger, Asian, or white patients from high-income zip codes or high SES backgrounds ( Conclusion: In this experimental study, the LLM's outputs exhibited significant disparities for oral cavity cancer reconstruction based on patient demographic variables in the setting of limited clinical information. Inputs to LLMs for clinical decision-making should include pertinent and detailed information to reduce the risk of bias. As insurers increasingly integrate AI for prior authorization, recognition of its biases, rigorous safeguards, and increased regulatory governance are needed to promote equitable health care.
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.