Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40453047›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Harnessing GPT-4 for automated error detection in pathology reports: Implications for oncology diagnostics.

Xiongwen Yang, Yun Zhang, Jinyan Jiang, Zhijun Chen, Rinasu Bai, Zihao Yuan, Longyan Dong, Yi Xiao, Di Liu, Huiyin Deng and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. 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. [Research progress of large language models in tumor diagnosis: applications in textual reports and medical imaging].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Observational
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

16 authors.

Xiongwen YangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4968-8953
Yun ZhangDepartment of Pathology, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Jinyan JiangDepartment of Pathology, The First People's Hospital of Chenzhou, Chenzhou, Hunan, China.
Zhijun ChenDepartment of Pathology, The First People's Hospital of Chenzhou, Chenzhou, Hunan, China.
Rinasu BaiDepartment of Pathology, Beijing Fengtai Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zihao YuanThe Second Clinical Medical College, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, Guangdong, China.
Longyan DongThe Second Clinical Medical College, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, Guangdong, China.
Yi XiaoDepartment of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Di LiuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Huiyin DengDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Jian HuangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China.
Huiyou ShiDepartment of Radiology, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Dan LiuDepartment of Medical Records and Statistics, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Maoli LiangNHC Key Laboratory of Pulmonary Immunological Diseases, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
WeiJuan TangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Chuan XuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Accurate pathology reports are crucial for the diagnosis and treatment planning of cancer patients. However, these reports are prone to errors due to time pressures, subjective interpretation, and inconsistencies among professionals. Addressing these errors is vital for improving oncology care outcomes. Artificial intelligence (AI) systems, such as GPT-4, offer the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and efficiency. Methods: A total of 700 malignant tumor pathology reports were collected from four hospitals. Of these, 350 reports had deliberate errors introduced by a senior pathologist, mimicking real-world reporting challenges. Error detection performance was evaluated by comparing GPT-4 to six human pathologists (two seniors, two attending pathologists, and two residents). Key metrics included error detection rates with Wilson confidence intervals and processing time per report. Results: GPT-4 detected 88% of errors (350/400; 95% CI: [84, 91]), compared to a 95% detection rate by the top senior pathologist (382/400; 95% CI: [93, 97]). GPT-4 significantly reduced the average processing time to 4.03 seconds per report, compared to 65.64 seconds for the fastest human pathologist. However, GPT-4 exhibited a higher rate of false positives (2.3%; 95% CI: [1.52, 3.01]) compared to the best-performing senior pathologist (0.3%; 95% CI: [0.01, 0.91]). Conclusions: GPT-4 demonstrates substantial potential in improving the efficiency and accuracy of pathology error detection, which could accelerate clinical workflows and enhance cancer diagnostics. However, its higher false-positive rate emphasizes the need for human oversight to ensure safe implementation in clinical practice.

Indexed as

artificial intelligence in oncologycancer diagnostics workflowdiagnostic accuracyLarge language modelpathology report error detection

Identifiers

PMID40453047
PMCPMC12123116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.