Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40498674›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025

Using a Large Language Model for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Classification and Malignancy Prediction to Enhance Breast Ultrasound Diagnosis: Retrospective Study.

Su Miaojiao, Liang Xia, Zeng Xian Tao, Hong Zhi Liang, Cheng Sheng, Wu Songsong

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07500428 (Construction of a Standardized Benchmark Evaluation System for Intelligent Breast Ultrasound Image Interpretation and Systematic Performance Assessment of Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Models Based on ACR BI-RADS v2025 Criteria), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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.

NCT07500428 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Construction of a Standardized Benchmark Evaluation System for Intelligent Breast Ultrasound Image Interpretation and Systematic Performance Assessment of Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Models Based on ACR BI-RADS v2025 Criteria

TypeobservationalSponsorPeking Union Medical College HospitalRan2026 to 2027Enrolled1,380ConditionsBreast Neoplasms, Breast Diseases, UltrasonographyArmsMultimodal AI Model Diagnostic Evaluation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Su Miaojiao *Department of Ultrasound, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Fuzhou University, 134 Dong Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou, 350500, China, 86 15960191609.ORCID 0009-0000-5251-1003
Liang Xia *Department of Ultrasound, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Fuzhou University, 134 Dong Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou, 350500, China, 86 15960191609.ORCID 0009-0005-2451-7535
Zeng Xian TaoDepartment of Ultrasound, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Fuzhou University, 134 Dong Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou, 350500, China, 86 15960191609.ORCID 0009-0000-7875-7079
Hong Zhi LiangDepartment of Ultrasound, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Fuzhou University, 134 Dong Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou, 350500, China, 86 15960191609.ORCID 0000-0001-8995-9995
Cheng ShengDepartment of Ultrasound, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Fuzhou University, 134 Dong Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou, 350500, China, 86 15960191609.ORCID 0000-0002-4761-6203
Wu Songsong *Department of Ultrasound, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Fuzhou University, 134 Dong Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou, 350500, China, 86 15960191609.ORCID 0009-0006-7590-0259

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Breast ultrasound is essential for evaluating breast nodules, with Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) providing standardized classification. However, interobserver variability among radiologists can affect diagnostic accuracy. Large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT-4 have shown potential in medical imaging interpretation. This study explores its feasibility in improving BI-RADS classification consistency and malignancy prediction compared to radiologists. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of using LLMs, particularly ChatGPT-4, to assess the consistency and diagnostic accuracy of standardized breast ultrasound imaging reports, using pathology as the reference standard. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed breast nodule ultrasound data from 671 female patients (mean 45.82, SD 9.20 years; range 26-75 years) who underwent biopsy or surgical excision at our hospital between June 2019 and June 2024. ChatGPT-4 was used to interpret BI-RADS classifications and predict benign versus malignant nodules. The study compared the model's performance to that of two senior radiologists (≥15 years of experience) and two junior radiologists (<5 years of experience) using key diagnostic metrics, including accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, P values, and odds ratios with 95% CIs. Two diagnostic models were evaluated: (1) image interpretation model, where ChatGPT-4 classified nodules based on BI-RADS features, and (2) image-to-text-LLM model, where radiologists provided textual descriptions, and ChatGPT-4 determined malignancy probability based on keywords. Radiologists were blinded to pathological outcomes, and BI-RADS classifications were finalized through consensus. Results: ChatGPT-4 achieved an overall BI-RADS classification accuracy of 96.87%, outperforming junior radiologists (617/671, 91.95% and 604/671, 90.01%, P<.01). For malignancy prediction, ChatGPT-4 achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.85), an accuracy of 80.63% (541/671 cases), a sensitivity of 90.56% (259/286 cases), and a specificity of 73.51% (283/385 cases). The image interpretation model demonstrated performance comparable to senior radiologists, while the image-to-text-LLM model further improved diagnostic accuracy for all radiologists, increasing their sensitivity and specificity significantly (P<.001). Statistical analyses, including the McNemar test and DeLong test, confirmed that ChatGPT-4 outperformed junior radiologists (P<.01) and showed noninferiority compared to senior radiologists (P>.05). Pathological diagnoses served as the reference standard, ensuring robust evaluation reliability. Conclusions: Integrating ChatGPT-4 into an image-to-text-LLM workflow improves BI-RADS classification accuracy and supports radiologists in breast ultrasound diagnostics. These results demonstrate its potential as a decision-support tool to enhance diagnostic consistency and reduce variability.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsUltrasonography, MammaryAdultAgedBreastFemaleHumansLarge Language ModelsMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityBI-RADSBreast Imaging Reporting and Data Systembreast ultrasoundChatGPT-4image-to-text–LLMlarge language models

Identifiers

PMID40498674
PMCPMC12175873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.