Evidence Hub

Artificial Intelligence and Multidisciplinary Oncology Decision-Making: A Systematic Review of LLM Concordance with MDT Recommendations and Implications for Clinical Reasoning Education

Ren Y, Su W, Wu Y, Dong S, Liang S, Yang X

Advances in medical education and practice, 2026

Abstract

Introduction: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) decision-making is a cornerstone of oncology practice and an important context for developing clinical reasoning skills. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models (LLMs), has recently been explored as a potential tool to support clinical decision-making in oncology settings.

Methods: This systematic review, conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines, synthesizes evidence on the concordance between LLM-generated recommendations and MDT decisions in oncology. Twenty-two studies were included, primarily comprising retrospective analyses comparing AI-generated outputs with expert MDT consensus across diagnostic, therapeutic, and workflow-related tasks.

Results: LLMs demonstrated generally moderate to high concordance with MDT decisions in guideline-constrained clinical scenarios. However, performance decreased in complex or less-structured cases. Variability in outcomes was associated with model architecture, prompting strategies, and retrieval-augmented approaches. Across studies, AI performance was most consistent when aligned with established clinical guidelines. Substantial heterogeneity existed among models and study designs, limiting direct comparability.

Conclusion: From a cognitive perspective, LLMs may be conceptualized as external information-processing tools that partially mirror structured aspects of MDT reasoning in specific contexts. However, evidence remains limited to retrospective concordance…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free