Assessing the performance of large language model Artificial Intelligence in thyroid cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) decision-making

Abstract Background Large language models (LLMs) have potential in augmenting clinical decision-making. The performance of three leading LLMs (ChatGPT, MetaAI, and DeepSeek) was evaluated in thyroid cancer MDT decision-making. Method Forty clinical cases (20 simulated/20 genuine), median age 45 (25–74), 26F, were discussed in a regional thyroid cancer MDT to provide the reference decisions. Cases were then blind-assessed by three LLMs that had been trained on contemporary guidelines, using uniform prompts. LLM outcomes were compared with reference decisions via a 4-point concordance score. Thematic analysis was performed. Results ChatGPT demonstrated the highest overall concordance score, 97/120 (36 cases concordant/near-concordant), DeepSeek scored 93/120 (33 concordant/near-concordant) and MetaAI performed least well 87/120. Despite identical guideline references, LLMs offered differing interpretation and application. ChatGPT offered the greatest nuance, with outputs that closely mirrored MDT phrasing and reasoning, especially around complex/borderline cases. ChatGPT and DeepSeek explicitly acknowledged patient choice, but ChatGPT more consistently contextualised it within guideline-compliant treatment options. MetaAI demonstrated more variability, with several examples of overtreatment or misalignment with current clinical practice. None of the LLMs recommended more recent treatment options for poorly-differentiated/anaplastic disease such as neoadjuvant or combination chemotherapy. Conclusion LLMs showed good concordance with clinical MDT decisions, even in complex real-world cases. However, despite receiving the same prompts there were differences in reasoning. ChatGPT’s nuanced, context-aware outputs appear most promising as a decision-support tool. Last, because LLMs lack intrinsic capability for continual learning at present, they have clear limitations, for example in keeping pace with some areas of advancing clinical practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British journal of surgery
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znaf267.004
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessing the performance of large language model Artificial Intelligence in thyroid cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) decision-making

Nitesh P. Patel, Alex W. White, David Scott‐Coombes, Richard Egan et al.
British journal of surgery
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Assessing the performance of large language model Artificial Intelligence in thyroid cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) decision-making

Nitesh P. Patel, Alex W. White, David Scott‐Coombes, Richard Egan, M. J. Stechman
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Large language models (LLMs) have potential in augmenting clinical decision-making. The performance of three leading LLMs (ChatGPT, MetaAI, and DeepSeek) was evaluated in thyroid cancer MDT decision-making. Method Forty clinical cases (20 simulated/20 genuine), median age 45 (25–74), 26F, were discussed in a regional thyroid cancer MDT to provide the reference decisions. Cases were then blind-assessed by three LLMs that had been trained on contemporary guidelines, using uniform prompts. LLM outcomes were compared with reference decisions via a 4-point concordance score. Thematic analysis was performed. Results ChatGPT demonstrated the highest overall concordance score, 97/120 (36 cases concordant/near-concordant), DeepSeek scored 93/120 (33 concordant/near-concordant) and MetaAI performed least well 87/120. Despite identical guideline references, LLMs offered differing interpretation and application. ChatGPT offered the greatest nuance, with outputs that closely mirrored MDT phrasing and reasoning, especially around complex/borderline cases. ChatGPT and DeepSeek explicitly acknowledged patient choice, but ChatGPT more consistently contextualised it within guideline-compliant treatment options. MetaAI demonstrated more variability, with several examples of overtreatment or misalignment with current clinical practice. None of the LLMs recommended more recent treatment options for poorly-differentiated/anaplastic disease such as neoadjuvant or combination chemotherapy. Conclusion LLMs showed good concordance with clinical MDT decisions, even in complex real-world cases. However, despite receiving the same prompts there were differences in reasoning. ChatGPT’s nuanced, context-aware outputs appear most promising as a decision-support tool. Last, because LLMs lack intrinsic capability for continual learning at present, they have clear limitations, for example in keeping pace with some areas of advancing clinical practice.

British journal of surgeryVol. 112(Supplement_16)
University Hospital of Wales (GB), Morriston Hospital (GB), Sport Wales (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
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.