ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2026
The daily dose: Early usability of an LLM tool for patient summaries and trial matching in radiation oncology.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Radiation oncology workflows generate large volumes of electronic health record (EHR) data requiring daily synthesis. Large language model (LLM)-based automation is promising, but workflow-embedded implementations at scale remain limited. We describe the design and early usability and adoption evaluation of The Daily Dose (TDD), an LLM-driven system for automated clinical summarization and trial identification in radiation oncology. Materials and methods: TDD delivers physician-specific email summaries each morning across three Mayo Clinic campuses using RadOnc-GPT (GPT-4o) to generate EHR-derived patient summaries and identify potentially eligible clinical trials for new or consult visits. One month post-deployment, an anonymous cross-sectional survey adapted from the System Usability Scale and Technology Acceptance Model was administered to all recipients. Results: Fifty-five of 110 users responded (50%); 94.5% were in radiation oncology and 69.1% were attending physicians. Overall, 83.6% used TDD at least several times per week. Mean domain scores (5-point Likert) were 3.89 ± 1.04 for usability and satisfaction, 3.43 ± 1.24 for perceived usefulness, and 3.80 ± 1.17 for impact and future use. Satisfaction was significantly associated with perceived time savings ( Conclusion: In this early usability and adoption evaluation, a workflow-integrated LLM summarization tool was widely adopted and generally favorably perceived. These findings reflect user perceptions; objective validation of summary accuracy, trial-matching performance, and workflow efficiency is needed to establish clinical impact.
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.