Large language models (LLMs) show promising accuracy on challenging tasks, including medical question answering. Yet, direct gains from model upgrades can plateau, and reliability issues persist. We introduce Iterative Consensus Ensemble (ICE), a proof-of-concept framework that refines answers through iterative reasoning and feedback among multiple LLMs. This ensemble method encourages diverse models to scrutinize each other’s outputs, converging on a consensus solution. We tested ICE on four different datasets. These included over 4,000 multiple-choice questions drawn from a newly curated primary care exam set, established medical benchmarks, and a PhD-level reasoning dataset. Compared to initial single-model attempts, ICE improved final overall accuracy by up to 27%. It reached accuracies 81% in medical subsets and 72% in multi-domain tasks from initial scores of about 72% and 60%, respectively. In a particularly challenging PhD-level reasoning benchmark (GPQA-diamond), ICE raised performance from 46.9% initially to 68.2% at the final consensus, a relative gain exceeding 45%. On a specialized family medicine dataset, ICE’s results were statistically indistinguishable from those of a complex reasoning model (O1-preview), despite O1’s higher cost and computational demands. Additional analyses showed that ICE’s iterative consensus remained effective under different prompting styles. Our proposed framework leverages standard LLMs and repeated prompting, requiring no specialized reward models or intricate token-level fusion. These findings show that iterative collaboration can transform LLM ensembles into more reliable, cost-efficient solvers, advancing performance in medical and general reasoning domains. Future refinements may integrate chain-of-thought steps or specialist models, extending this approach to more complex challenges as LLMs and benchmarks continue to evolve.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This study did not receive any funding

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I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the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

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors