Performance of Clinical AI System and Physicians and Frontier Language Models in primary care diagnostics
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Clinical AI evaluation should encompass diagnosis and management after adaptive information gathering. We compared Doctorina, eight physicians and four standalone frontier language models in 150 synthetic Polish-language primary-care consultations. Doctorina achieved 82.0% Top-1 concordance versus 57.0% for physicians (difference, 25.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 17.7-32.7) and 97.3% versus 85.0% primary-or-reference-differential concordance. Across 149 case pairs, normalized workup and treatment scores were 89.4 versus 66.9 and 83.7 versus 61.2. Doctorina had the highest diagnostic point estimates among all six groups; Kimi K3 ranked next, while Claude Opus 5 led the closely spaced management estimates of Opus, Doctorina and Kimi. A second Doctorina execution reproduced the advantages over physicians across all outcomes. Doctorina's advantage over physicians therefore extended from primary-diagnosis selection to higher-rated diagnostic workup and initial treatment after adaptive consultation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Sep 2026.
Builds on
3 of 17 references.
References · 3
- 2022Large Language Models Encode Clinical Knowledgecited by 1,830
- 2023Towards Accurate Differential Diagnosis with Large Language Modelscited by 116
- 2024Polish-English medical knowledge transfer: A new benchmark and resultscited by 8
Built on by
Not cited yet.