ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2025
Can ChatGPT4-vision identify radiologic progression of multiple sclerosis on brain MRI?
Article in European radiology experimental, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating expert decision-pattern alignment in endovascular planning for intracranial aneurysms using a multimodal large language model.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Technical architecture for integrating vision-language models with DICOM viewers.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Can AI write reports like a radiologist? A blinded evaluation of large language model-generated lumbar spine MRI reports.European radiology experimental · 2026Observational
- Large Language Models in Clinical Neurology: A Systematic Review.Research square · 2026Article
- RadCLARE: an automated clinical language engine for detecting semantic errors in radiology reports.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Integrating big data and artificial intelligence to predict progression in multiple sclerosis: challenges and the path forward.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Detecting New Lesions Using a Large Language Model: Applications in Real-World Multiple Sclerosis Datasets.Annals of neurology · 2025Article
- Chatbots in Radiology: Current Applications, Limitations and Future Directions of ChatGPT in Medical Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe large language model ChatGPT can now accept image input with the GPT4-vision (GPT4V) version. We aimed to compare the performance of GPT4V to pretrained U-Net and vision transformer (ViT) models for the identification of the progression of multiple sclerosis (MS) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
methodsPaired coregistered MR images with and without progression were provided as input to ChatGPT4V in a zero-shot experiment to identify radiologic progression. Its performance was compared to pretrained U-Net and ViT models. Accuracy was the primary evaluation metric and 95% confidence interval (CIs) were calculated by bootstrapping. We included 170 patients with MS (50 males, 120 females), aged 21-74 years (mean 42.3), imaged at a single institution from 2019 to 2021, each with 2-5 MRI studies (496 in total).
resultsOne hundred seventy patients were included, 110 for training, 30 for tuning, and 30 for testing; 100 unseen paired images were randomly selected from the test set for evaluation. Both U-Net and ViT had 94% (95% CI: 89-98%) accuracy while GPT4V had 85% (77-91%). GPT4V gave cautious nonanswers in six cases. GPT4V had precision (specificity), recall (sensitivity), and F1 score of 89% (75-93%), 92% (82-98%), 91 (82-97%) compared to 100% (100-100%), 88 (78-96%), and 0.94 (88-98%) for U-Net and 94% (87-100%), 94 (88-100%), and 94 (89-98%) for ViT.
conclusionThe performance of GPT4V combined with its accessibility suggests has the potential to impact AI radiology research. However, misclassified cases and overly cautious non-answers confirm that it is not yet ready for clinical use. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: GPT4V can identify the radiologic progression of MS in a simplified experimental setting. However, GPT4V is not a medical device, and its widespread availability highlights the need for caution and education for lay users, especially those with limited access to expert healthcare. KEY POINTS: Without fine-tuning or the need for prior coding experience, GPT4V can perform a zero-shot radiologic change detection task with reasonable accuracy. However, in absolute terms, in a simplified "spot the difference" medical imaging task, GPT4V was inferior to state-of-the-art computer vision methods. GPT4V's performance metrics were more similar to the ViT than the U-net. This is an exploratory experimental study and GPT4V is not intended for use as a medical device.
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.