mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

LLMs for clinical risk prediction

arXiv 2409.10191 ↗First posted 16 Sep 2024cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This study compares the efficacy of GPT-4 and clinalytix Medical AI in predicting the clinical risk of delirium development. Findings indicate that GPT-4 exhibited significant deficiencies in identifying positive cases and struggled to provide reliable probability estimates for delirium risk, while clinalytix Medical AI demonstrated superior accuracy. A thorough analysis of the large language model's (LLM) outputs elucidated potential causes for these discrepancies, consistent with limitations reported in extant literature. These results underscore the challenges LLMs face in accurately diagnosing conditions and interpreting complex clinical data. While LLMs hold substantial potential in healthcare, they are currently unsuitable for independent clinical decision-making. Instead, they should be employed in assistive roles, complementing clinical expertise. Continued human oversight remains essential to ensure optimal outcomes for both patients and healthcare providers.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2024.

Builds on

6 of 11 references.

References · 6

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  3. 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,383
  4. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,056
  5. 2022Large Language Models Encode Clinical Knowledgecited by 1,807
  6. 2024GPT-4V Cannot Generate Radiology Reports Yetcited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.