Assessing the clinical competence of large language models for tobacco use disorder: A multi-domain expert evaluation.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Journal of Addictive Diseases Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-06 DOI:10.1080/10550887.2026.2636620
Thiago P Fernandes, Linnea Dahlgren, Natanael A Santos, Zeke Degraff
{"title":"Assessing the clinical competence of large language models for tobacco use disorder: A multi-domain expert evaluation.","authors":"Thiago P Fernandes, Linnea Dahlgren, Natanael A Santos, Zeke Degraff","doi":"10.1080/10550887.2026.2636620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tobacco use disorder (TUD) remains the leading preventable cause of death globally, yet fewer than one-third of users receive guideline-concordant care due to workforce shortages and training gaps. Emerging artificial intelligence (AI) systems, particularly large language models (LLMs), may help expand access to evidence-based cessation support, but their clinical competence remains insufficiently characterized.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically evaluate the clinical accuracy, safety, guideline adherence, and communication quality of five leading LLMs across standardized tobacco-cessation scenarios.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed 84 clinical vignettes, covering five core competency domains (screening, diagnosis, pharmacotherapy, behavioral counseling, and harm reduction) based on DSM-5-TR, U.S. Public Health Service Guidelines, NICE NG209, ASAM guidelines, SAMHSA protocols, and the WHO MPOWER framework. Five LLMs, GPT-4.5, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Llama 3.1-70B, and DeepSeek-V3, were independently evaluated by four addiction-medicine experts across clinical accuracy, guideline adherence, safety, and clinical utility.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GPT-4.5 and Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved the highest composite scores (<i>M</i> = 4.25, SD = 0.68; <i>M</i> = 4.18, SD = 0.71), with 74-78% of responses rated ≥4.0 and superior safety performance (88% ≥4.0). Gemini 2.5 Pro showed moderate performance (<i>M</i> = 3.72; 52% ≥4.0). Open-weight models (Llama 3.1-70B, M = 3.48; DeepSeek-V3, M = 3.35) lagged behind overall, with only 34-38% achieving the ≥4.0 benchmark.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All evaluated AI systems demonstrated competence in tobacco-cessation counseling, but GPT-4.5 and Claude 3.5 Sonnet reached performance levels consistent with supervised clinical use and safety-critical scenarios. Clinician oversight remains essential for all medication-based interventions, and open-weight models warrant further validation before consideration for clinical implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":47493,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Addictive Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"413-422"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Addictive Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10550887.2026.2636620","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Tobacco use disorder (TUD) remains the leading preventable cause of death globally, yet fewer than one-third of users receive guideline-concordant care due to workforce shortages and training gaps. Emerging artificial intelligence (AI) systems, particularly large language models (LLMs), may help expand access to evidence-based cessation support, but their clinical competence remains insufficiently characterized.

Objective: To systematically evaluate the clinical accuracy, safety, guideline adherence, and communication quality of five leading LLMs across standardized tobacco-cessation scenarios.

Methods: We developed 84 clinical vignettes, covering five core competency domains (screening, diagnosis, pharmacotherapy, behavioral counseling, and harm reduction) based on DSM-5-TR, U.S. Public Health Service Guidelines, NICE NG209, ASAM guidelines, SAMHSA protocols, and the WHO MPOWER framework. Five LLMs, GPT-4.5, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Llama 3.1-70B, and DeepSeek-V3, were independently evaluated by four addiction-medicine experts across clinical accuracy, guideline adherence, safety, and clinical utility.

Results: GPT-4.5 and Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved the highest composite scores (M = 4.25, SD = 0.68; M = 4.18, SD = 0.71), with 74-78% of responses rated ≥4.0 and superior safety performance (88% ≥4.0). Gemini 2.5 Pro showed moderate performance (M = 3.72; 52% ≥4.0). Open-weight models (Llama 3.1-70B, M = 3.48; DeepSeek-V3, M = 3.35) lagged behind overall, with only 34-38% achieving the ≥4.0 benchmark.

Conclusion: All evaluated AI systems demonstrated competence in tobacco-cessation counseling, but GPT-4.5 and Claude 3.5 Sonnet reached performance levels consistent with supervised clinical use and safety-critical scenarios. Clinician oversight remains essential for all medication-based interventions, and open-weight models warrant further validation before consideration for clinical implementation.

评估烟草使用障碍大语言模型的临床能力:多领域专家评价。
背景:烟草使用障碍(TUD)仍然是全球可预防的主要死亡原因,但由于劳动力短缺和培训差距,不到三分之一的使用者获得符合指南的护理。新兴的人工智能(AI)系统,特别是大型语言模型(llm),可能有助于扩大获得基于证据的戒烟支持,但其临床能力仍未充分表征。目的:系统评估5种主要llm在标准化戒烟情景下的临床准确性、安全性、指南依从性和沟通质量。方法:基于DSM-5-TR、美国公共卫生服务指南、NICE NG209、ASAM指南、SAMHSA协议和WHO MPOWER框架,我们开发了84个临床小实验,涵盖5个核心能力领域(筛查、诊断、药物治疗、行为咨询和减少伤害)。四名成瘾医学专家对GPT-4.5、Claude 3.5 Sonnet、Gemini 2.5 Pro、Llama 3.1-70B和DeepSeek-V3这五种llm进行了临床准确性、指南依从性、安全性和临床实用性的独立评估。结果:GPT-4.5和Claude 3.5 Sonnet的综合评分最高(M = 4.25, SD = 0.68; M = 4.18, SD = 0.71), 74-78%的应答评分≥4.0,安全性能较好(88%≥4.0)。Gemini 2.5 Pro表现中等(M = 3.72; 52%≥4.0)。开放重量模型(Llama 3.1-70B, M = 3.48; DeepSeek-V3, M = 3.35)总体落后,只有34-38%的模型达到≥4.0的基准。结论:所有被评估的人工智能系统都显示出在戒烟咨询方面的能力,但GPT-4.5和Claude 3.5 Sonnet达到了与监督临床使用和安全关键场景一致的性能水平。临床医生的监督对于所有基于药物的干预措施仍然至关重要,在考虑临床实施之前,开放体重模型需要进一步验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Journal of Addictive Diseases is an essential, comprehensive resource covering the full range of addictions for today"s addiction professional. This in-depth, practical journal helps you stay on top of the vital issues and the clinical skills necessary to ensure effective practice. The latest research, treatments, and public policy issues in addiction medicine are presented in a fully integrated, multi-specialty perspective. Top researchers and respected leaders in addiction issues share their knowledge and insights to keep you up-to-date on the most important research and practical applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书