Calibration of commercial AI chatbots for cancer symptom recognition: A pilot methodology study.

e13698 Background: AI chatbots are increasingly used for health queries, yet their calibration for cancer recognition remains uncharacterized. How should AI respond to users with varying health literacy presenting equivalent clinical scenarios? Methods: We developed 114 calibrated queries across 10 cancer types, three pretest probability scenarios (high, low, diagnostic trap), and three user personas (naive patient, sophisticated patient, expert clinician) presenting equivalent clinical scenarios with varying linguistic framing. Each query was submitted to Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini (n = 342 evaluable responses). Responses were scored using a keyword-matching algorithm. Results: Algorithm-derived Expected Calibration Alignment was 76.0% overall. High pretest probability scenarios showed 89.6% alignment; low pretest showed 38.9%, suggesting frequent over-escalation. Response thoroughness varied by persona: expert queries elicited responses ~2x longer than naive queries across all platforms. Expert responses included pre-test probabilities and workup protocols; naive responses provided general advice to "see a doctor." Conclusions: Current AI chatbots calibrate response thoroughness to query sophistication rather than clinical need. This raises alignment questions with equity implications: should AI proactively provide detailed guidance to users who don't know to ask for it? Data available via OSF.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2026-05-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.e13698
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

Calibration of commercial AI chatbots for cancer symptom recognition: A pilot methodology study.

Jennifer M. Hinkel, Taylor Hirschberg, Cory Kidd
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Calibration of commercial AI chatbots for cancer symptom recognition: A pilot methodology study.

Jennifer M. Hinkel, Taylor Hirschberg, Cory Kidd
article en

Abstract

e13698 Background: AI chatbots are increasingly used for health queries, yet their calibration for cancer recognition remains uncharacterized. How should AI respond to users with varying health literacy presenting equivalent clinical scenarios? Methods: We developed 114 calibrated queries across 10 cancer types, three pretest probability scenarios (high, low, diagnostic trap), and three user personas (naive patient, sophisticated patient, expert clinician) presenting equivalent clinical scenarios with varying linguistic framing. Each query was submitted to Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini (n = 342 evaluable responses). Responses were scored using a keyword-matching algorithm. Results: Algorithm-derived Expected Calibration Alignment was 76.0% overall. High pretest probability scenarios showed 89.6% alignment; low pretest showed 38.9%, suggesting frequent over-escalation. Response thoroughness varied by persona: expert queries elicited responses ~2x longer than naive queries across all platforms. Expert responses included pre-test probabilities and workup protocols; naive responses provided general advice to "see a doctor." Conclusions: Current AI chatbots calibrate response thoroughness to query sophistication rather than clinical need. This raises alignment questions with equity implications: should AI proactively provide detailed guidance to users who don't know to ask for it? Data available via OSF.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 44(16_suppl)
University of Oxford (GB), Healthcentric Advisors (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
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.