ArticlePloS one2024
Extraction of clinical data on major pulmonary diseases from unstructured radiologic reports using a large language model.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine learning approaches for EGFR mutation status prediction in NSCLC: an updated systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Enhancing bone metastasis CT report analysis: a comparison of local and proprietary large language models for privacy and resource efficiency.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Insufficient reporting quality in large language model studies in the field of radiology.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Predicting treatment retention in medication for opioid use disorder: a machine learning approach using NLP and LLM-derived clinical features.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Article
- Large Language Model Versus Manual Review for Clinical Data Curation in Breast Cancer: Retrospective Comparative Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Data extraction from free-text stroke CT reports using GPT-4o and Llama-3.3-70B: the impact of annotation guidelines.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Evaluation of large language models in generating pulmonary nodule follow-up recommendations.European journal of radiology open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite significant strides in big data technology, extracting information from unstructured clinical data remains a formidable challenge. This study investigated the utility of large language models (LLMs) for extracting clinical data from unstructured radiological reports without additional training. In this retrospective study, 1800 radiologic reports, 600 from each of the three university hospitals, were collected, with seven pulmonary outcomes defined. Three pulmonology-trained specialists discerned the presence or absence of diseases. Data extraction from the reports was executed using Google Gemini Pro 1.0, OpenAI's GPT-3.5, and GPT-4. The gold standard was predicated on agreement between at least two pulmonologists. This study evaluated the performance of the three LLMs in diagnosing seven pulmonary diseases (active tuberculosis, emphysema, interstitial lung disease, lung cancer, pleural effusion, pneumonia, and pulmonary edema) utilizing chest radiography and computed tomography scans. All models exhibited high accuracy (0.85-1.00) for most conditions. GPT-4 consistently outperformed its counterparts, demonstrating a sensitivity of 0.71-1.00; specificity of 0.89-1.00; and accuracy of 0.89 and 0.99 across both modalities, thus underscoring its superior capability in interpreting radiological reports. Notably, the accuracy of pleural effusion and emphysema on chest radiographs and pulmonary edema on chest computed tomography scans reached 0.99. The proficiency of LLMs, particularly GPT-4, in accurately classifying unstructured radiological data hints at their potential as alternatives to the traditional manual chart reviews conducted by clinicians.
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.