Abstract 4147550: Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of GPT-4, Grok, and Gemini in Different Fields of Cardiology

Introduction: The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in clinical practice seems increasingly possible, although comparative studies are needed to achieve standardization. GPT-4, Grok and Gemini are three commonly used LLMs. While these LLMs may exhibit some level of clinical reasoning, their performance could differ between them and between areas of cardiology. Aim: To evaluate the clinical reasoning of GPT-4, Grok and Gemini in distinct fields of cardiology. Methods: A total of 12 cases were selected from the AHA Circulation Journal, representing six cardiology areas: General Cardiology (GC), Interventional Cardiology (IC), Cardiac Imaging (CI), Electrophysiology (EP), Heart Failure (HF) and Congenital Heart Disease (CHD). Each area included two cases. We only provided the case presentation to the LLMs, ensuring they were unaware of the diagnosis and management. Four questions were asked with the following prompts: 1. What are the diagnostic steps?, 2. What is the most likely diagnosis?, 3. What is the differential diagnosis?, 4. What is the appropriate management?. The responses were systematically evaluated with a digital rubric through an international collaboration of 12 cardiologists from various institutions. Each cardiologist evaluated two cases in their area of expertise and was aware of the diagnosis and management. One-way ANOVA was used for analysis. Results: GPT-4 had a slightly best overall performance (Table 1) and the highest score in GC and CHD; Grok excelled in determining the management and was superior in CI, HF and IC; Gemini had the highest performance in EP, although these findings were not statistically significant (Table 2). Conclusions: This is one of the first studies comparing the clinical reasoning of LLMs in cardiology. Our results propose that GPT-4 has the best overall performance and Grok is superior indicating the management. More studies comparing LLMs are required for further standardization of their use.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2024-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4147550
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.21
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4147550: Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of GPT-4, Grok, and Gemini in Different Fields of Cardiology

Juan Manuel López-Quijano, Jonathan Reyes-Rivera, Alberto Castro Molina, Anas Samman et al.
3 citations
Circulation
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
1.21
article

Abstract 4147550: Evaluating the Clinical Reasoning of GPT-4, Grok, and Gemini in Different Fields of Cardiology

Juan Manuel López-Quijano, Jonathan Reyes-Rivera, Alberto Castro Molina, Anas Samman, Sajid Ali, Matías Calandrelli, Gerald Chi, Cecilia Bahit, Antonio Gordillo‐Moscoso, Edgar García‐Cruz, CHARLES L. GIBSON, M. R. Moore, Asif Ali, Stephanie Angulo, Jorge Saucedo, Marco Romero-Lorenzo
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Introduction: The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in clinical practice seems increasingly possible, although comparative studies are needed to achieve standardization. GPT-4, Grok and Gemini are three commonly used LLMs. While these LLMs may exhibit some level of clinical reasoning, their performance could differ between them and between areas of cardiology. Aim: To evaluate the clinical reasoning of GPT-4, Grok and Gemini in distinct fields of cardiology. Methods: A total of 12 cases were selected from the AHA Circulation Journal, representing six cardiology areas: General Cardiology (GC), Interventional Cardiology (IC), Cardiac Imaging (CI), Electrophysiology (EP), Heart Failure (HF) and Congenital Heart Disease (CHD). Each area included two cases. We only provided the case presentation to the LLMs, ensuring they were unaware of the diagnosis and management. Four questions were asked with the following prompts: 1. What are the diagnostic steps?, 2. What is the most likely diagnosis?, 3. What is the differential diagnosis?, 4. What is the appropriate management?. The responses were systematically evaluated with a digital rubric through an international collaboration of 12 cardiologists from various institutions. Each cardiologist evaluated two cases in their area of expertise and was aware of the diagnosis and management. One-way ANOVA was used for analysis. Results: GPT-4 had a slightly best overall performance (Table 1) and the highest score in GC and CHD; Grok excelled in determining the management and was superior in CI, HF and IC; Gemini had the highest performance in EP, although these findings were not statistically significant (Table 2). Conclusions: This is one of the first studies comparing the clinical reasoning of LLMs in cardiology. Our results propose that GPT-4 has the best overall performance and Grok is superior indicating the management. More studies comparing LLMs are required for further standardization of their use.

CirculationVol. 150(Suppl_1)
Emory University (US), Autonomous University of San Luis Potosí (MX), Medical College of Wisconsin (US), Hospital de Sant Pau (ES), Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires (AR), Instituto Nacional de Cardiología (MX), The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
1.21
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.