Trial reportJAMA network open2023
Comparison of Chest Radiograph Captions Based on Natural Language Processing vs Completed by Radiologists.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fully automated artificial intelligence-based coronary CT angiography image processing: efficiency, diagnostic capability, and risk stratification.European radiology · 2024Trial
- Comparative evaluation of generative AI models for chest radiograph report generation in the emergency department.European radiology · 2026Article
- WiNGPT-32B: An Open-Source, Locally Deployable LLM for RECIST Assessment via Chained Task Execution Using Radiology Report Text.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Multimodal Learning with Privileged Report Supervision for Generalizable Tuberculosis Detection on Chest Radiographs.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Fully automated multi-sequence detection and alignment of focal liver lesions in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.European radiology · 2026Article
- Comparison of conventional 512-matrix CT images with Swin2SR-based 2048-matrix images in the visualization and diagnosis of lung nodules.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Keyword-based AI assistance in the generation of radiology reports: A pilot study.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Generative artificial intelligence for fundus fluorescein angiography interpretation and human expert evaluation.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- A Transformer-Based Pipeline for German Clinical Document De-Identification.Applied clinical informatics · 2025Article
- Preliminary Evidence of the Use of Generative AI in Health Care Clinical Services: Systematic Narrative Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Review
- Advances in research and application of artificial intelligence and radiomic predictive models based on intracranial aneurysm images.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Clinical applications of generative artificial intelligence in radiology: image translation, synthesis, and text generation.BJR artificial intelligence · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Artificial intelligence (AI) can interpret abnormal signs in chest radiography (CXR) and generate captions, but a prospective study is needed to examine its practical value. Objective: To prospectively compare natural language processing (NLP)-generated CXR captions and the diagnostic findings of radiologists. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter diagnostic study was conducted. The training data set included CXR images and reports retrospectively collected from February 1, 2014, to February 28, 2018. The retrospective test data set included consecutive images and reports from April 1 to July 31, 2019. The prospective test data set included consecutive images and reports from May 1 to September 30, 2021. Exposures: A bidirectional encoder representation from a transformers model was used to extract language entities and relationships from unstructured CXR reports to establish 23 labels of abnormal signs to train convolutional neural networks. The participants in the prospective test group were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 different caption generation models: a normal template, NLP-generated captions, and rule-based captions based on convolutional neural networks. For each case, a resident drafted the report based on the randomly assigned captions and an experienced radiologist finalized the report blinded to the original captions. A total of 21 residents and 19 radiologists were involved. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to write reports based on different caption generation models. Results: The training data set consisted of 74 082 cases (39 254 [53.0%] women; mean [SD] age, 50.0 [17.1] years). In the retrospective (n = 8126; 4345 [53.5%] women; mean [SD] age, 47.9 [15.9] years) and prospective (n = 5091; 2416 [47.5%] women; mean [SD] age, 45.1 [15.6] years) test data sets, the mean (SD) area under the curve of abnormal signs was 0.87 (0.11) in the retrospective data set and 0.84 (0.09) in the prospective data set. The residents' mean (SD) reporting time using the NLP-generated model was 283 (37) seconds-significantly shorter than the normal template (347 [58] seconds; P < .001) and the rule-based model (296 [46] seconds; P < .001). The NLP-generated captions showed the highest similarity to the final reports with a mean (SD) bilingual evaluation understudy score of 0.69 (0.24)-significantly higher than the normal template (0.37 [0.09]; P < .001) and the rule-based model (0.57 [0.19]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this diagnostic study of NLP-generated CXR captions, prior information provided by NLP was associated with greater efficiency in the reporting process, while maintaining good consistency with the findings of radiologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.