ArticleJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology2026
Therapeutic Decisions in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: ChatGPT-4.0 Compared to Medical Expertise.
Article in JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 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
Introduction: With the increasing prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and its complex management, evaluating innovative approaches became essential. Large language models (LLM), such as ChatGPT-4.0, have remarkably advanced, yet their application in IBD management remains unexplored. This study compares therapeutic recommendations generated by ChatGPT-4.0 with those made by IBD specialists, evaluating its potential and limitations in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: This prospective observational study, conducted between September 2024 and March 2025, included 47 cases of IBD patients requiring initiation or modification of biologic therapy. Standardized clinical vignettes were presented to both IBD specialists and ChatGPT-4.0. For each case, three sequential questions were addressed: the choice of the therapeutic class of the treatment, the specific molecule in this class, and if the proposition is a monotherapy or combination therapy. Agreement was measured using the percentage concordance and Cohen's kappa coefficient ( Results: The agreement between the IBD specialists and ChatGPT-4.0 was 76.6% ( Conclusion: This study highlights a promising area of ChatGPT-4.0 application in the therapeutic management of IBD. However, it is not suitable as a standalone or fully reliable resource for decision-making in healthcare. Future development of tailored healthcare GPT integrating European guidelines and experts' feedback may further improve LLM performance.
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.