Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) offer potential benefits in clinical care. However, concerns remain regarding socio-demographic biases embedded in their outputs. Opioid prescribing is one domain in which these biases can have serious implications, especially given the ongoing opioid epidemic and the need to balance effective pain management with addiction risk. We tested ten LLMs—both open-access and closed-source—on 1,000 acute-pain vignettes. Half of the vignettes were labeled as non-cancer and half as cancer. Each vignette was presented in 34 socio-demographic variations, including a control group without demographic identifiers. We analyzed the models’ recommendations on opioids, anxiety treatment, perceived psychological stress, risk scores, and monitoring recommendations. Overall, yielding 3.4 million model-generated responses. Using logistic and linear mixed-effects models, we measured how these outputs varied by demographic group and whether a cancer diagnosis intensified or reduced observed disparities. Across both cancer and non-cancer cases, historically marginalized groups—especially cases labeled as individuals who are unhoused, Black, or identify as LGBTQIA+—often received more or stronger opioid recommendations, sometimes exceeding 90% in cancer settings, despite being labeled as high risk by the same models. Meanwhile, low-income or unemployed groups were assigned elevated risk scores yet fewer opioid recommendations, hinting at inconsistent rationales. Disparities in anxiety treatment and perceived psychological stress similarly clustered within marginalized populations, even when clinical details were identical. These patterns diverged from standard guidelines and point to model-driven bias rather than acceptable clinical variation. Our findings underscore the need for rigorous bias evaluation and the integration of guideline-based checks in LLMs to ensure equitable and evidence-based pain care.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported in part through the computational and data resources and staff expertise provided by Scientific Computing and Data at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) grant UL1TR004419 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Research reported in this publication was also supported by the Office of Research Infrastructure of the National Institutes of Health under award number S10OD026880 and S10OD030463. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The funders played no role in study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data, or the writing of this manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Financial disclosure – This work was supported in part through the computational and data resources and staff expertise provided by Scientific Computing and Data at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) grant UL1TR004419 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Research reported in this publication was also supported by the Office of Research Infrastructure of the National Institutes of Health under award number S10OD026880 and S10OD030463. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The funders played no role in study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data, or the writing of this manuscript.
Competing interest – None declared for all authors.
Ethical approval was not required for this research as only synthetic open-access data was used.
Contributorship Statement: MO led the study design, cases validation, data analysis, visualizations, and manuscript drafting. SS helped constructing the study design, cases validation and draft writing and editing. RA, YH, DUA, AWC, NLB, BSG, GNN, and EK all contributed significantly to the project, editing and revising the manuscript.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
