ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Evaluation of a large language model for clinician-facing preoperative cost-communication preparation in total knee arthroplasty.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Costs associated with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may affect treatment preparation, expectation management, and postoperative care planning. Previous large language model (LLM) studies have focused mainly on medical question answering, patient education, and clinical decision support, whereas their performance in clinician-facing preoperative cost-communication preparation remains unclear. This study evaluated an LLM using real-world clinical records from two hospitals in an expert-referenced offline evaluation. Methods: Preoperative medical records of 80 patients who underwent primary unilateral TKA at two hospitals in China from January to May 2026 were included. A structured expert-panel process was used to develop a preoperative cost-communication framework comprising 4 dimensions and 17 clinical cues and to establish case-level minimum necessary communication items (CL-MNCIs) for each case. Task 1 assessed identification of the 17 cues. Task 2 assessed CL-MNCI coverage and classified all generated items according to case relevance, medical-record support, redundancy, and safety. Twenty-four cases were non-randomly selected by CL-MNCI count for three repeated-generation runs. Results: Task 1 comprised 1,360 case-label classification units. Micro-precision, micro-recall, micro-F1, accuracy, MCC, and macro-F1 were 0.901, 0.888, 0.894, 0.948, 0.860, and 0.840, respectively. Experts established 569 CL-MNCIs, of which 483 were covered, yielding an overall coverage rate of 84.9%; complete coverage was achieved in 17 cases. The LLM generated 716 items, including 12 safety events across 9 cases, 483 items matching CL-MNCIs, 132 record-supported supplementary items, 50 redundant items, and 39 items with insufficient record support. Overall, 665 items (92.9%) were case-relevant and record-supported, although this proportion included redundant content. Pairwise Jaccard similarity for covered CL-MNCI sets ranged from 0.813 to 0.823. Of 180 CL-MNCIs, 126 (70.0%) were covered in all three runs, and case-level agreement in safety classification ranged from 87.5 to 95.8%. Conclusion: The LLM showed offline potential for identifying cost-communication cues and generating clinician-facing preparation checklists for TKA, but content omissions, quality variation, safety risks, and substantive cross-run variability remained. Its use should be limited to clinician-reviewed communication preparation and should not replace direct patient cost disclosure or professional judgment.
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.