Large language model agents can use tools to perform clinical calculations

Large language models (LLMs) can answer expert-level questions in medicine but are prone to hallucinations and arithmetic errors. Early evidence suggests LLMs cannot reliably perform clinical calculations, limiting their potential integration into clinical workflows. We evaluated ChatGPT's performance across 48 medical calculation tasks, finding incorrect responses in one-third of trials (n = 212). We then assessed three forms of agentic augmentation: retrieval-augmented generation, a code interpreter tool, and a set of task-specific calculation tools (OpenMedCalc) across 10,000 trials. Models with access to task-specific tools showed the greatest improvement, with LLaMa and GPT-based models demonstrating a 5.5-fold (88% vs 16%) and 13-fold (64% vs 4.8%) reduction in incorrect responses, respectively, compared to the unimproved models. Our findings suggest that integration of machine-readable, task-specific tools may help overcome LLMs' limitations in medical calculations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
npj Digital Medicine
Published
2025-03-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-025-01475-8
Citations
22
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
14.40

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Large language model agents can use tools to perform clinical calculations

Dara Rouholiman, Alex J. Goodell, Larry F. Chu, Simon N. Chu
22 citations
npj Digital Medicine
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
14.40
article

Large language model agents can use tools to perform clinical calculations

Dara Rouholiman, Alex J. Goodell, Larry F. Chu, Simon N. Chu
article en
22 citations

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) can answer expert-level questions in medicine but are prone to hallucinations and arithmetic errors. Early evidence suggests LLMs cannot reliably perform clinical calculations, limiting their potential integration into clinical workflows. We evaluated ChatGPT's performance across 48 medical calculation tasks, finding incorrect responses in one-third of trials (n = 212). We then assessed three forms of agentic augmentation: retrieval-augmented generation, a code interpreter tool, and a set of task-specific calculation tools (OpenMedCalc) across 10,000 trials. Models with access to task-specific tools showed the greatest improvement, with LLaMa and GPT-based models demonstrating a 5.5-fold (88% vs 16%) and 13-fold (64% vs 4.8%) reduction in incorrect responses, respectively, compared to the unimproved models. Our findings suggest that integration of machine-readable, task-specific tools may help overcome LLMs' limitations in medical calculations.

npj Digital MedicineVol. 8(1)
University of California, San Francisco (US), Stanford Medicine (US), Stanford University (US)
National Institutes of Health, University of California, San Francisco
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
14.40
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.

Large language model agents can use tools to perform clinical calculations — Dara Rouholiman, Alex J. Goodell, et al. · npj Digital Medicine (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS