ArticleCureus2024
Optimizing Diagnostic Performance of ChatGPT: The Impact of Prompt Engineering on Thoracic Radiology Cases.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of ChatGPT and Internet Research for Clinical Research and Decision-Making in Occupational Medicine: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2025Trial
- Context-Guided Mixture-of-Experts with Multimodal LLMs for Lesion Detection in Buccal Mucosa Images.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Evaluating ChatGPT-5 for Detection of Barrett's Esophagus and Grading of Esophagitis: A Multiclass Endoscopic Image Analysis.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Can AI write your code? A case study of chatgpt's statistical coding capabilities for quantitative research.Health economics review · 2026Article
- Evaluating Multiple Input Strategies of Large Language Models for Gallbladder Polyps on Ultrasound: Comparative Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Performance of GPT-4o Compared to Radiology Residents in Emergency Abdominal Tomography Cases.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- Gender Differences in the Use of ChatGPT as Generative Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Research and Decision-Making in Occupational Medicine.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Diagnostic performance of multimodal large language models in radiological quiz cases: the effects of prompt engineering and input conditions.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2025Article
- Evaluating the influence of prompt formulation on the reliability and repeatability of ChatGPT in implant-supported prostheses.PloS one · 2025Article
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of GPT-based differential diagnostic accuracy in radiological cases: 2023-2025.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Recent studies have highlighted the diagnostic performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and GPT-4 in a text-based format, demonstrating their radiological knowledge across different areas. Our objective is to investigate the impact of prompt engineering on the diagnostic performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and GPT-4 in diagnosing thoracic radiology cases, highlighting how the complexity of prompts influences model performance. Methodology We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study using 124 publicly available
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.