Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39968311›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of biomedical imaging2025

Radiology Report Annotation Using Generative Large Language Models: Comparative Analysis.

Bayan Altalla', Ashraf Ahmad, Layla Bitar, Mohammed Al-Bssol, Amal Al Omari, Iyad Sultan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of biomedical imaging, 2025. 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. RadAnnotate: Large Language Models for Efficient and Reliable Radiology Report Annotation.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2026
    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

6 authors.

Bayan Altalla'Office of Scientific Affairs and Research, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7792-3054
Ashraf AhmadSchool of Computing Sciences, Princess Sumaya University for Technology, Amman, Jordan.
Layla BitarArtificial Intelligence and Data Innovation Office, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan.
Mohammed Al-BssolOffice of Scientific Affairs and Research, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan.
Amal Al OmariOffice of Scientific Affairs and Research, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan.
Iyad SultanArtificial Intelligence and Data Innovation Office, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs), particularly GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, have sparked significant interest in their application within the medical field. This research offers a detailed comparative analysis of the abilities of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in the context of annotating radiology reports and generating impressions from chest computed tomography (CT) scans. The primary objective is to use these models to assist healthcare professionals in handling routine documentation tasks. Employing methods such as in-context learning (ICL) and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), the study focused on generating impression sections from radiological findings. Comprehensive evaluation was applied using a variety of metrics, including recall-oriented understudy for gisting evaluation (ROUGE) for n-gram analysis, Instructor Similarity for contextual similarity, and BERTScore for semantic similarity, to assess the performance of these models. The study shows distinct performance differences between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 across both zero-shot and few-shot learning scenarios. It was observed that certain prompts significantly influenced the performance outcomes, with specific prompts leading to more accurate impressions. The RAG method achieved a superior BERTScore of 0.92, showcasing its ability to generate semantically rich and contextually accurate impressions. In contrast, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 excel in preserving language tone, with Instructor Similarity scores of approximately 0.92 across scenarios, underscoring the importance of prompt design in effective summarization tasks. The findings of this research emphasize the critical role of prompt design in optimizing model efficacy and point to the significant potential for further exploration in prompt engineering. Moreover, the study advocates for the standardized integration of such advanced LLMs in healthcare practices, highlighting their potential to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of medical documentation.

Indexed as

GPT-4in-context learning (ICL)large language models (LLMs)medical documentation automationprompt engineeringradiology report annotationretrieval-augmented generation (RAG)

Identifiers

PMID39968311
PMCPMC11835477

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.