ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026
Standardizing Heterogeneous MRI Series Description Metadata Using Large Language Models.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MRI metadata, particularly free-text series descriptions (SDs) used to identify sequences, are highly heterogeneous due to variable inputs by manufacturers and technologists. This variability poses challenges in correctly identifying series for hanging protocols and dataset curation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of large language models (LLMs) to automatically classify MRI SDs. We analyzed non-contrast brain MRIs performed between 2016 and 2022 at our institution, identifying all unique SDs in the metadata. A practicing neuroradiologist manually classified the SD text into: "T1," "T2," "T2/FLAIR," "SWI," "DWI," ADC," or "Other." Then, various LLMs, including GPT 3.5 Turbo, GPT-4, GPT-4o, Llama 3 8b, and Llama 3 70b, were asked to classify each SD into one of the sequence categories. Model performances were compared to ground truth classification using area under the curve (AUC) as the primary metric. Additionally, GPT-4o was tasked with generating regular expression templates to match each category. In 2510 MRI brain examinations, there were 1395 unique SDs, with 727/1395 (52.1%) appearing only once, indicating high variability. GPT-4o demonstrated the highest performance, achieving an average AUC of 0.983 ± 0.020 for all series with detailed prompting. GPT models significantly outperformed Llama models, with smaller differences within the GPT family. Regular expression generation was inconsistent, demonstrating an average AUC of 0.774 ± 0.161 for all sequences. Our findings suggest that LLMs are effective for interpreting and standardizing heterogeneous MRI SDs.
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.