Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39677135›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Evaluation of ChatGPT 4.0 in Thoracic Imaging and Diagnostics.

Golnaz Lotfian, Keyur Parekh, Mohammed Abdul Sami, Pokhraj P Suthar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Golnaz LotfianDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, USA.
Keyur ParekhDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, USA.
Mohammed Abdul SamiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, USA.
Pokhraj P SutharDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advancements in natural language processing (NLP) have profoundly transformed the medical industry, enhancing large cohort data analysis, improving diagnostic capabilities, and streamlining clinical workflows. Among the leading tools in this domain is ChatGPT 4.0 (OpenAI, San Francisco, California, US), a commercial NLP model widely used across various applications. This study evaluates the diagnostic performance of ChatGPT 4.0 specifically in thoracic imaging by assessing its ability to answer diagnostic questions related to this field. We utilized the model to respond to multiple-choice questions derived from thoracic imaging scenarios, followed by rigorous statistical analysis to assess its accuracy and variability across different subgroups. Our analysis revealed significant variability across different subgroups. Overall, the model achieved an impressive accuracy of 84.9% in diagnosing thoracic radiology questions. It excelled in terminology and diagnostic signs, achieving perfect scores, and demonstrated strong performance in the intensive care and normal anatomy categories, with accuracies of 90% and 80%, respectively. In pathology subgroups, ChatGPT achieved an average accuracy of 89.1%, particularly excelling in diagnosing infectious pneumonia and atelectasis, though it scored lower in diffuse alveolar disease (66.7%). For disease-related questions, the mean accuracy was 79.1%, with perfect scores in several specific subcategories. However, accuracy was notably lower for vascular disease (50%) and lung cancer (66.7%). In conclusion, while ChatGPT 4.0 shows strong potential in diagnosing thoracic conditions, the variability identified underscores the necessity for ongoing research and refinement of its transformer architecture. This will enhance its reliability and applicability in broader clinical and patient care settings.

Indexed as

aigptmachine learningnatural language processingnlpthoracic imaging

Identifiers

PMID39677135
PMCPMC11646414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.