Abstract:Background: Patients with rare and complex diseases often experience delayed diagnoses and misdiagnoses because comprehensive knowledge about these diseases is limited to only a few medical experts. In this context, large language models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful knowledge aggregation tools with applications in clinical decision support and education domains. Objective: This study aims to explore the potential of 3 popular LLMs, namely Bard (Google LLC), ChatGPT-3.5 (OpenAI), and GPT-4 (OpenAI), in medical education to enhance the diagnosis of rare and complex diseases while investigating the impact of prompt engineering on their performance. Methods: We conducted experiments on publicly available complex and rare cases to achieve these objectives. We implemented various prompt strategies to evaluate the performance of these models using both open-ended and multiple-choice prompts. In addition, we used a majority voting strategy to leverage diverse reasoning paths within language models, aiming to enhance their reliability. Furthermore, we compared their performance with the performance of human respondents and MedAlpaca, a generative LLM specifically designed for medical tasks. Results: Notably, all LLMs outperformed the average human consensus and MedAlpaca, with a minimum margin of 5% and 13%, respectively, across all 30 cases from the diagnostic case challenge collection. On the frequently misdiagnosed cases category, Bard tied with MedAlpaca but surpassed the human average consensus by 14%, whereas GPT-4 and ChatGPT-3.5 outperformed MedAlpaca and the human respondents on the moderately often misdiagnosed cases category with minimum accuracy scores of 28% and 11%, respectively. The majority voting strategy, particularly with GPT-4, demonstrated the highest overall score across all cases from the diagnostic complex case collection, surpassing that of other LLMs. On the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III data sets, Bard and GPT-4 achieved the highest diagnostic accuracy scores, with multiple-choice prompts scoring 93%, whereas ChatGPT-3.5 and MedAlpaca scored 73% and 47%, respectively. Furthermore, our results demonstrate that there is no one-size-fits-all prompting approach for improving the performance of LLMs and that a single strategy does not universally apply to all LLMs. Conclusions: Our findings shed light on the diagnostic capabilities of LLMs and the challenges associated with identifying an optimal prompting strategy that aligns with each language model's characteristics and specific task requirements. The significance of prompt engineering is highlighted, providing valuable insights for researchers and practitioners who use these language models for medical training. Furthermore, this study represents a crucial step toward understanding how LLMs can enhance diagnostic reasoning in rare and complex medical cases, paving the way for developing effective educational tools and accurate diagnostic aids to improve patient care and outcomes.

Towards Accurate Differential Diagnosis with Large Language Models

Interpretable Differential Diagnosis with Dual-Inference Large Language Models

Evaluating the Impact of Lab Test Results on Large Language Models Generated Differential Diagnoses from Clinical Case Vignettes

Improving Clinical Expertise in Large Language Models Using Electronic Medical Records

Evaluation of large language models as a diagnostic aid for complex medical cases

Evaluating large language model workflows in clinical decision support: referral, triage, and diagnosis

Large language models encode clinical knowledge

Demystifying Large Language Models for Medicine: A Primer

Large Language Model Influence on Diagnostic Reasoning

LLMD: A Large Language Model for Interpreting Longitudinal Medical Records

A comparison of the diagnostic ability of large language models in challenging clinical cases

Large Language Models for Disease Diagnosis: A Scoping Review

Evaluating large language models on medical, lay language, and self-reported descriptions of genetic conditions

Combining Insights From Multiple Large Language Models Improves Diagnostic Accuracy

Evaluating large language models in medical applications: a survey

Large Language Model Influence on Diagnostic Reasoning: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Deciphering Diagnoses: How Large Language Models Explanations Influence Clinical Decision Making

On the limitations of large language models in clinical diagnosis

Learning to Make Rare and Complex Diagnoses With Generative AI Assistance: Qualitative Study of Popular Large Language Models

Systematic benchmarking demonstrates large language models have not reached the diagnostic accuracy of traditional rare-disease decision support tools

Evaluation and mitigation of the limitations of large language models in clinical decision-making