ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Performance of Large Language Models in Diagnosing Rare Hematologic Diseases and the Impact of Their Diagnostic Outputs on Physicians: Combined Retrospective and Prospective Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Performance of Large Language Models for Orthopedic-Related Rare Diseases and Their Impact on Physicians' Diagnostic Accuracy: 2-Stage Comparative Evaluation Study Based on the Chinese Rare Disease Catalog.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Retrieval-Augmented Language Models for Clinical Decision Support in the Classification of Inborn Errors of Immunity.Journal of clinical immunology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rare hematologic diseases are frequently underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed due to their clinical complexity. Whether new-generation large language models (LLMs), particularly those using chain-of-thought reasoning, can improve diagnostic accuracy remains unclear. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of new-generation commercial LLMs in rare hematologic diseases and to determine whether the LLM output enhances physicians' diagnostic accuracy. Methods: We conducted a 2-phase study. In the retrospective phase, we evaluated 7 mainstream LLMs on 158 nonpublic real-world admission records covering 9 rare hematologic diseases, assessed diagnostic performance using top-10 accuracy and mean reciprocal rank (MRR), and evaluated ranking stability via Jaccard similarity and entropy. Spearman rank correlation was used to examine the association between physicians' diagnoses and LLM-generated outputs. In the prospective phase, 28 physicians with varying levels of experience diagnosed 5 cases each, gaining access to LLM-generated diagnoses across 3 sequential steps to assess whether LLMs can improve diagnostic accuracy. Results: In the retrospective phase, ChatGPT-o1-preview demonstrated the highest top-10 accuracy (70.3%) and MRR (0.577), and DeepSeek-R1 ranked second. Diagnostic performance was low for amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis; Castleman disease; Erdheim-Chester disease; and polyneuropathy, organomegaly, endocrinopathy, monoclonal gammopathy, and skin changes (POEMS) syndrome. Interestingly, higher accuracy often correlated with lower ranking stability across most LLMs. The physician performance showed a strong correlation with both top-10 accuracy (ρ=0.565) and MRR (ρ=0.650). In the prospective phase, LLMs significantly improved the diagnostic accuracy of less-experienced physicians; no significant benefit was observed for specialists. However, when LLMs generated biased responses, physician performance often failed to improve or even declined. Conclusions: Without fine-tuning, new-generation commercial LLMs, particularly those with chain-of-thought reasoning, can identify diagnoses of rare hematologic diseases with high accuracy and significantly enhance the diagnostic performance of less-experienced physicians. Nevertheless, biased LLM outputs may mislead clinicians, highlighting the need for critical appraisal and cautious clinical integration with appropriate safeguard systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.