Large Language Model–Based Virtual Patient Systems for History-Taking in Medical Education: Comprehensive Systematic Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (OpenAI), have been transforming virtual patient systems in medical education by providing scalable and cost-effective alternatives to standardized patients. However, systematic evaluations of their performance, particularly for multimorbidity scenarios involving multiple coexisting diseases, are still limited. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to evaluate LLM-based virtual patient systems for medical history-taking, addressing four research questions: (1) simulated patient types and disease scope, (2) performance-enhancing techniques, (3) experimental designs and evaluation metrics, and (4) dataset characteristics and availability. METHODS: Following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020, 9 databases were searched (January 1, 2020, to August 18, 2025). Nontransformer LLMs and non-history-taking tasks were excluded. Multidimensional quality and bias assessments were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 39 studies were included, screened by one computer science researcher under supervision. LLM-based virtual patient systems mainly simulated internal medicine and mental health disorders, with many addressing distinct single disease types but few covering multimorbidity or rare conditions. Techniques like role-based prompts, few-shot learning, multiagent frameworks, knowledge graph (KG) integration (top-k accuracy 16.02%), and fine-tuning enhanced dialogue and diagnostic accuracy. Multimodal inputs (eg, speech and imaging) improved immersion and realism. Evaluations, typically involving 10-50 students and 3-10 experts, demonstrated strong performance (top-k accuracy: 0.45-0.98, hallucination rate: 0.31%-5%, System Usability Scale [SUS] ≥80). However, small samples, inconsistent metrics, and limited controls restricted generalizability. Common datasets such as MIMIC-III (Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III) exhibited intensive care unit (ICU) bias and lacked diversity, affecting reproducibility and external validity. CONCLUSIONS: Included studies showed moderate risk of bias, inconsistent metrics, small cohorts, and limited dataset transparency. LLM-based virtual patient systems excel in simulating multiple disease types but lack multimorbidity patient representation. KGs improve top-k accuracy and support structured disease representation and reasoning. Future research should prioritize hybrid KG-chain-of-thought architectures integrated with open-source KGs (eg, UMLS [Unified Medical Language System] and SNOMED-CT [Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms]), parameter-efficient fine-tuning, dialogue compression, multimodal LLMs, standardized metrics, larger cohorts, and open-access multimodal datasets to further enhance realism, diagnostic accuracy, fairness, and educational utility.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».