Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40464926›Full record

ArticleNeuroradiology2025

Boosting LLM-assisted diagnosis: 10-minute LLM tutorial elevates radiology residents' performance in brain MRI interpretation.

Su Hwan Kim, Severin Schramm, Jonas Wihl, Philipp Raffler, Marlene Tahedl, Julian Canisius, Ina Luiken, Lukas Endrös, Stefan Reischl, Alexander Marka and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

15 authors.

Su Hwan KimInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. suhwan.kim@tum.de.
Severin SchrammInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Jonas WihlInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Philipp RafflerInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Marlene TahedlInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Julian CanisiusInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ina LuikenInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Lukas EndrösInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Stefan ReischlInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Alexander MarkaInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Robert WalterInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Mathias SchillmaierInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Claus ZimmerInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Benedikt WiestlerInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Dennis Martin HedderichInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Brain DiseasesClinical CompetenceInternship and ResidencyLarge Language ModelsMagnetic Resonance ImagingRadiologyDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansBrainDifferential diagnosisHuman-AI interactionLarge language modelsMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID40464926
PMCPMC12494612

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.