ArticleScientific reports2026
Trajectory-aware risk stratification of oral lichen planus using a multimodal large language model: a longitudinal diagnostic accuracy study.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
To evaluate the performance of a multimodal large language model (LLM) for longitudinal trajectory classification and risk stratification of oral lichen planus (OLP), compared with expert panel consensus. This retrospective diagnostic accuracy study included 300 patients with histopathologically confirmed OLP and at least 24 months of follow-up. Multimodal longitudinal case profiles (serial clinical records, intraoral photographs, and histopathology reports) were independently assessed by (ChatGPT, OpenAI) and an expert panel (the reference standard), both blinded to the results. The primary outcome was sensitivity for the detecting expert-defined high-risk cases (one-versus-rest). Secondary outcomes included overall trajectory classification and three-level risk stratification. Expert consensus classified 156 cases (52.0%) as stable benign, 92 (30.7%) as inflammatory progression, and 52 (17.3%) as suspicious malignant evolution. Risk stratification was 73 low (24.3%), 161 moderate (53.7%), and 66 high (22.0%). For high-risk detection, sensitivity was 78.8% (95% CI 67.2-87.5), and specificity was 99.6% (95% CI 97.6-100.0). Overall trajectory classification accuracy was 94.7%. Three-level risk stratification accuracy was 76.3%, with most errors representing downward shifts (98.6%). The multimodal LLM showed high concordance with expert consensus for longitudinal OLP surveillance, with high accuracy of trajectory classification and high specificity for high-risk identification. These findings suggest that multimodal LLMs may support trajectory-based assessment through integration of longitudinal clinical information, although prospective external validation remains necessary.
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.