MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408688552 · doi:10.2196/65263

Large Language Models for Pediatric Differential Diagnoses in Rural Health Care: Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing GPT-3 With Pediatrician Performance

2025· article· en· W4408688552 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masab Mansoor, Andrew M. Ibrahim, David Grindem

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIRx Med · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical diagnosisMedicineRetrospective cohort studyPediatricsCohortHealth careCohort studyFamily medicineSurgeryInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Rural health care providers face unique challenges such as limited specialist access and high patient volumes, making accurate diagnostic support tools essential. Large language models like GPT-3 have demonstrated potential in clinical decision support but remain understudied in pediatric differential diagnosis. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of a fine-tuned GPT-3 model compared to board-certified pediatricians in rural health care settings. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study analyzed 500 pediatric encounters (ages 0-18 years; n=261, 52.2% female) from rural health care organizations in Central Louisiana between January 2020 and December 2021. The GPT-3 model (DaVinci version) was fine-tuned using the OpenAI application programming interface and trained on 350 encounters, with 150 reserved for testing. Five board-certified pediatricians (mean experience: 12, SD 5.8 years) provided reference standard diagnoses. Model performance was assessed using accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and subgroup analyses. Results: The GPT-3 model achieved an accuracy of 87.3% (131/150 cases), sensitivity of 85% (95% CI 82%-88%), and specificity of 90% (95% CI 87%-93%), comparable to pediatricians' accuracy of 91.3% (137/150 cases; P=.47). Performance was consistent across age groups (0-5 years: 54/62, 87%; 6-12 years: 47/53, 89%; 13-18 years: 30/35, 86%) and common complaints (fever: 36/39, 92%; abdominal pain: 20/23, 87%). For rare diagnoses (n=20), accuracy was slightly lower (16/20, 80%) but comparable to pediatricians (17/20, 85%; P=.62). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that a fine-tuned GPT-3 model can provide diagnostic support comparable to pediatricians, particularly for common presentations, in rural health care. Further validation in diverse populations is necessary before clinical implementation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIRx MedSame topicClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsFrench-language works237,207