TRV-2026-1683Certified recordPeer-reviewed

Large language models in the diagnosis and treatment of immunosuppression-related infections in rheumatic diseases: a comparative, vignette-based study

This study compared the diagnostic accuracy, initial test selection, and initial treatment choices of three current-generation Large Language Models (LLMs) with those of two infectious disease specialists in managing infectious complications in patients with immunosuppressed rheumatic disease. This cross-sectional comparative study utilized 100 standardized Turkish-language clinical vignettes, developed by an expert committee, encompassing ten infection categories: viral, bone/joint, respiratory, central nervous…

Health · Good Space — documented gain · certified 2026-10-17 · v1 · article view · machine-readable

Current reading — gain

On 100 standardized vignettes, three LLMs answered more items correctly than two infectious disease specialists in diagnosis, work-up and initial treatment, suggesting a possible decision-support role for rare or opportunistic infections.

What this doesn’t fix

The vignettes were standardized written cases with one prespecified correct answer and only two human comparators, so results reflect a structured written task rather than superiority in clinical care; prospective real-world validation is still needed.

Evidence

Reader signal

How should this claim be treated?

Cite this record

Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-1683, v1: “Large language models in the diagnosis and treatment of immunosuppression-related infections in rheumatic diseases: a comparative, vignette-based study.” Truvace, 2026-10-17. /record/TRV-2026-1683 (accessed at citation time). sha256 df1fbf2909e58c2c…

Calibration history

Every change to this record since certification, in the open. None yet — the reading has held since it entered the record.

  1. Certifiedv1df1fbf2909e5…

    Certified into the record

Verify this record
How to verify without trusting this page

Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-1683 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.