ArticleNeuroradiology2025
Boosting LLM-assisted diagnosis: 10-minute LLM tutorial elevates radiology residents' performance in brain MRI interpretation.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Weakly supervised language models for automated extraction of critical findings from radiology reports.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the impact of a structured tutorial on the use of a large language model (LLM)-based search engine on radiology residents’ performance in brain MRI differential diagnosis.
methodsIn this study, nine radiology residents determined the three most likely differential diagnoses for three sets of ten brain MRI cases with a challenging yet definite diagnosis. Each set was assessed (1) with the support of conventional internet search, (2) using an LLM-based search engine (© Perplexity AI) without prior tutorial, or (3) using the LLM-based search engine after a structured 10-minute tutorial. Reader responses were rated using a binary and numeric scoring system. Reading times and confidence levels (measured on a 5-point Likert scale) were recorded for each case. Search engine logs were examined to quantify user interaction metrics, and to identify hallucinations and misinterpretations in LLM responses.
resultsRadiology residents achieved the highest accuracy when employing the LLM-based search engine following the tutorial, indicating the correct diagnosis among the top three differential diagnoses in 62.5% of cases (55/88). This was followed by the LLM-assisted workflow before the tutorial (44.8%; 39/87) and the conventional internet search workflow (32.2%; 28/87). The LLM tutorial led to significantly higher performance (binary scores: p = 0.042, numeric scores: p = 0.016) and confidence (p = 0.006) but resulted in no relevant differences in reading times. Hallucinations were found in 5.1% of LLM queries.
conclusionOur findings demonstrate the considerable benefits that even low-effort educational interventions on LLMs can provide, highlighting their potential role in radiology training programs.
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.