Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41743425›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Tests of large language models' medical competence and application for clinical decision support of musculoskeletal rehabilitation.

Ruikang Liu, Qiaoling Liu, Qiang Hu, Ruixing Nan, Jian He, Jinru Yang, Jialin Zhang, Guang Yang, Zhaohui Yang, Xiling Xiao and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models for Breast Cancer Patient Education: A Comparative Study.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Ruikang LiuDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Qiaoling LiuDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Qiang HuDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Ruixing NanDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Jian HeDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Jinru YangDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Jialin ZhangDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Guang YangDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Zhaohui YangDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Xiling XiaoDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Xiaoxuan XiaDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Yongchao WuDepartment of Rehabilitation, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Large language models (LLMs) are currently abundant and diverse, yet clinicians lack clarity on top performers, with uncertainty about general LLMs' expertise in musculoskeletal rehabilitation. This study aims to investigate the potential and correctness of LLMs in clinical application, and to evaluate whether LLMs could assist primary rehabilitation therapists to prepare for rehabilitation examination. Method: 8 primary doctors and therapists tested 10 LLMs in the first test, 5 senior doctors and therapists assessed answers in the second test, and 5 primary therapists acted as examinees in the third test. We assessed the quality of case analysis based on six different dimensions, including Case Understanding, Clinical Reasoning, Primary Diagnosis, Differential Diagnosis, Treatment Plan Accuracy and Safety, and Guidelines & Consensus. Results: In the first test, only ERNIE Bot X1 Turbo and Doubao 1.5 pro had accuracy rates of over 90%, and Chinese LLMs had significantly fewer incorrect questions than English LLMs (9.6% vs. 14.8%, Conclusions: Doubao 1.5 pro possessed competent ability and application prospects, and was assessed as the best LLM for answering musculoskeletal rehabilitation questions. We also demonstrated that the response quality of local-language LLMs was significantly better than that of English LLMs in answering localized language questions.

Indexed as

ChatGPTDeepSeekgenerative artificial intelligencelarge language modelsrehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID41743425
PMCPMC12929487

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.