ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024
Using Natural Language Processing (GPT-4) for Computed Tomography Image Analysis of Cerebral Hemorrhages in Radiology: Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06230419 (Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence's Ability to Analyze and Recognize Cranial Trauma CT Imaging), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence's Ability to Analyze and Recognize Cranial Trauma CT Imaging
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Article
- Artificial intelligence in radiology: diagnostic sensitivity of ChatGPT for detecting hemorrhages in cranial computed tomography scans.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2026Article
- Performance of Large Language Models in Recognizing Brain MRI Sequences: A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT-4o, Claude 4 Opus, and Gemini 2.5 Pro.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Do LLMs Have 'the Eye' for MRI? Evaluating GPT-4o, Grok, and Gemini on Brain MRI Performance: First Evaluation of Grok in Medical Imaging and a Comparative Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Predicting Immunotherapy Response in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Comparative Study of Large Language Models and Human Experts.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
- Smart Pharmaceutical Monitoring System With Personalized Medication Schedules and Self-Management Programs for Patients With Diabetes: Development and Evaluation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Detection of Intracranial Hemorrhage from Computed Tomography Images: Diagnostic Role and Efficacy of ChatGPT-4o.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCerebral hemorrhage is a critical medical condition that necessitates a rapid and precise diagnosis for timely medical intervention, including emergency operation. Computed tomography (CT) is essential for identifying cerebral hemorrhage, but its effectiveness is limited by the availability of experienced radiologists, especially in resource-constrained regions or when shorthanded during holidays or at night. Despite advancements in artificial intelligence-driven diagnostic tools, most require technical expertise. This poses a challenge for widespread adoption in radiological imaging. The introduction of advanced natural language processing (NLP) models such as GPT-4, which can annotate and analyze images without extensive algorithmic training, offers a potential solution.
objectiveThis study investigates GPT-4's capability to identify and annotate cerebral hemorrhages in cranial CT scans. It represents a novel application of NLP models in radiological imaging.
methodsIn this retrospective analysis, we collected 208 CT scans with 6 types of cerebral hemorrhages at Ren Ji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, between January and September 2023. All CT images were mixed together and sequentially numbered, so each CT image had its own corresponding number. A random sequence from 1 to 208 was generated, and all CT images were inputted into GPT-4 for analysis in the order of the random sequence. The outputs were subsequently examined using Photoshop and evaluated by experienced radiologists on a 4-point scale to assess identification completeness, accuracy, and success.
resultsThe overall identification completeness percentage for the 6 types of cerebral hemorrhages was 72.6% (SD 18.6%). Specifically, GPT-4 achieved higher identification completeness in epidural and intraparenchymal hemorrhages (89.0%, SD 19.1% and 86.9%, SD 17.7%, respectively), yet its identification completeness percentage in chronic subdural hemorrhages was very low (37.3%, SD 37.5%). The misidentification percentages for complex hemorrhages (54.0%, SD 28.0%), epidural hemorrhages (50.2%, SD 22.7%), and subarachnoid hemorrhages (50.5%, SD 29.2%) were relatively high, whereas they were relatively low for acute subdural hemorrhages (32.6%, SD 26.3%), chronic subdural hemorrhages (40.3%, SD 27.2%), and intraparenchymal hemorrhages (26.2%, SD 23.8%). The identification completeness percentages in both massive and minor bleeding showed no significant difference (P=.06). However, the misidentification percentage in recognizing massive bleeding was significantly lower than that for minor bleeding (P=.04). The identification completeness percentages and misidentification percentages for cerebral hemorrhages at different locations showed no significant differences (all P>.05). Lastly, radiologists showed relative acceptance regarding identification completeness (3.60, SD 0.54), accuracy (3.30, SD 0.65), and success (3.38, SD 0.64).
conclusionsGPT-4, a standout among NLP models, exhibits both promising capabilities and certain limitations in the realm of radiological imaging, particularly when it comes to identifying cerebral hemorrhages in CT scans. This opens up new directions and insights for the future development of NLP models in radiology.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT06230419; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06230419.
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.