John Tayu Lee, Vincent Cheng-Sheng Li, Jia-Jyun Wu, Hsiao-Hui Chen, Sophia Sin-Yu Su, Brian Pin-Hsuan Chang, Richard Lee Lai, Chi-Hung Liu, Chung-Ting Chen, Valis Tanapima, Toby Kai-Bo Shen, Rifat Atun
{"title":"脑卒中护理生成式大型语言模型的性能评价","authors":"John Tayu Lee, Vincent Cheng-Sheng Li, Jia-Jyun Wu, Hsiao-Hui Chen, Sophia Sin-Yu Su, Brian Pin-Hsuan Chang, Richard Lee Lai, Chi-Hung Liu, Chung-Ting Chen, Valis Tanapima, Toby Kai-Bo Shen, Rifat Atun","doi":"10.1038/s41746-025-01830-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Stroke is a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, disproportionately impacting lower socioeconomic groups. In this study, we evaluated three generative LLMs—GPT, Claude, and Gemini—across four stages of stroke care: prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation. Using three prompt engineering techniques—Zero-Shot Learning (ZSL), Chain of Thought (COT), and Talking Out Your Thoughts (TOT)—we applied each to realistic stroke scenarios. Clinical experts assessed the outputs across five domains: (1) accuracy; (2) hallucinations; (3) specificity; (4) empathy; and (5) actionability, based on clinical competency benchmarks. Overall, the LLMs demonstrated suboptimal performance with inconsistent scores across domains. Each prompt engineering method showed strengths in specific areas: TOT does well in empathy and actionability, COT was strong in structured reasoning during diagnosis, and ZSL provided concise, accurate responses with fewer hallucinations, especially in the Treatment stage. However, none consistently met high clinical standards across all stroke care stages.</p>","PeriodicalId":19349,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Digital Medicine","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":15.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of performance of generative large language models for stroke care\",\"authors\":\"John Tayu Lee, Vincent Cheng-Sheng Li, Jia-Jyun Wu, Hsiao-Hui Chen, Sophia Sin-Yu Su, Brian Pin-Hsuan Chang, Richard Lee Lai, Chi-Hung Liu, Chung-Ting Chen, Valis Tanapima, Toby Kai-Bo Shen, Rifat Atun\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41746-025-01830-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Stroke is a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, disproportionately impacting lower socioeconomic groups. In this study, we evaluated three generative LLMs—GPT, Claude, and Gemini—across four stages of stroke care: prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation. Using three prompt engineering techniques—Zero-Shot Learning (ZSL), Chain of Thought (COT), and Talking Out Your Thoughts (TOT)—we applied each to realistic stroke scenarios. Clinical experts assessed the outputs across five domains: (1) accuracy; (2) hallucinations; (3) specificity; (4) empathy; and (5) actionability, based on clinical competency benchmarks. Overall, the LLMs demonstrated suboptimal performance with inconsistent scores across domains. Each prompt engineering method showed strengths in specific areas: TOT does well in empathy and actionability, COT was strong in structured reasoning during diagnosis, and ZSL provided concise, accurate responses with fewer hallucinations, especially in the Treatment stage. However, none consistently met high clinical standards across all stroke care stages.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19349,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NPJ Digital Medicine\",\"volume\":\"90 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":15.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NPJ Digital Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-025-01830-9\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Digital Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-025-01830-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of performance of generative large language models for stroke care
Stroke is a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, disproportionately impacting lower socioeconomic groups. In this study, we evaluated three generative LLMs—GPT, Claude, and Gemini—across four stages of stroke care: prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation. Using three prompt engineering techniques—Zero-Shot Learning (ZSL), Chain of Thought (COT), and Talking Out Your Thoughts (TOT)—we applied each to realistic stroke scenarios. Clinical experts assessed the outputs across five domains: (1) accuracy; (2) hallucinations; (3) specificity; (4) empathy; and (5) actionability, based on clinical competency benchmarks. Overall, the LLMs demonstrated suboptimal performance with inconsistent scores across domains. Each prompt engineering method showed strengths in specific areas: TOT does well in empathy and actionability, COT was strong in structured reasoning during diagnosis, and ZSL provided concise, accurate responses with fewer hallucinations, especially in the Treatment stage. However, none consistently met high clinical standards across all stroke care stages.
期刊介绍:
npj Digital Medicine is an online open-access journal that focuses on publishing peer-reviewed research in the field of digital medicine. The journal covers various aspects of digital medicine, including the application and implementation of digital and mobile technologies in clinical settings, virtual healthcare, and the use of artificial intelligence and informatics.
The primary goal of the journal is to support innovation and the advancement of healthcare through the integration of new digital and mobile technologies. When determining if a manuscript is suitable for publication, the journal considers four important criteria: novelty, clinical relevance, scientific rigor, and digital innovation.