Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Humans and Large Language Models in Clinical Decision Support: A Study with Medical Calculators

  • Nicholas C. Wan
  • , Qiao Jin
  • , Joey Chan
  • , Guangzhi Xiong
  • , Serina Applebaum
  • , Aidan Gilson
  • , Reid McMurry
  • , R. Andrew Taylor
  • , Aidong Zhang
  • , Qingyu Chen
  • , Zhiyong Lu
  • National Institutes of Health
  • University of Virginia
  • Yale University
  • Harvard University
  • Boston University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Although large language models (LLMs) have been assessed for general medical knowledge using licensing exams, their ability to support clinical decision-making, such as selecting medical calculators, remains uncertain. We assessed nine LLMs, including open-source, proprietary, and domain-specific models, with 1,009 multiple-choice question-answer pairs across 35 clinical calculators and compared LLMs to humans on a subset of questions. While the highest-performing LLM, OpenAI's o1, provided an answer accuracy of 66.0% (CI: 56.7-75.3%) on the subset of 100 questions, two human annotators nominally outperformed LLMs with an average answer accuracy of 79.5% (CI: 73.5-85.0%). Ultimately, we evaluated medical trainees and LLMs in recommending medical calculators across clinical scenarios like risk stratification and diagnosis. With error analysis showing that the highest -performing LLMs continue to make mistakes in comprehension (49.3% of errors) and calculator knowledge (7.1% of errors), our findings highlight that LLMs are not superior to humans in calculator recommendation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1305-1314
Number of pages10
JournalAMIA Annual Symposium proceedings
Volume2024
StatePublished - 2024

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Humans and Large Language Models in Clinical Decision Support: A Study with Medical Calculators'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this