Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40557058›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Diagnostic Performance of ChatGPT-4o in Detecting Hip Fractures on Pelvic X-rays.

Turgut Emre Erdem, Alper Kirilmaz, Ahmet Fevzi Kekec

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Turgut Emre ErdemOrthopedics and Traumatology, HG Hospital, Kahramanmaras, TUR.
Alper KirilmazOrthopedics and Trauma, Konya City Hospital, Konya, TUR.
Ahmet Fevzi KekecOrthopedics and Traumatology, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, TUR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHip fractures are a major orthopedic problem, especially in the elderly population. Hip fractures are usually diagnosed by clinical evaluation and imaging, especially X-rays. In recent years, new approaches to fracture detection have emerged with the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning techniques in medical imaging. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ChatGPT-4o, an artificial intelligence model, in diagnosing hip fractures. METHODOLOGY: A total of 200 anteroposterior pelvic X-ray images were retrospectively analyzed. Half of the images belonged to patients with surgically confirmed hip fractures, including both displaced and non-displaced types, while the other half represented patients with soft tissue trauma and no fractures. Each image was evaluated by ChatGPT-4o through a standardized prompt, and its predictions (fracture vs. no fracture) were compared against the gold standard diagnoses. Diagnostic performance metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, Cohen's kappa, and F1 score were calculated.

resultsChatGPT-4o demonstrated an overall accuracy of 82.5% in detecting hip fractures on pelvic radiographs, with a sensitivity of 78.0% and specificity of 87.0%. PPVs and NPVs were 85.7% and 79.8%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.825, indicating good discriminative performance. Among 22 false-negative cases, 68.2% were non-displaced fractures, suggesting the model had greater difficulty identifying subtle radiographic findings. Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.65, showing substantial agreement with actual diagnoses. Chi-square analysis revealed a strong correlation (χ² = 82.59,

conclusionsChatGPT-4o shows promising accuracy in identifying hip fractures on pelvic X-rays, especially when fractures are displaced. However, its sensitivity drops significantly for non-displaced fractures, leading to many false negatives. This highlights the need for caution when interpreting negative AI results, particularly when clinical suspicion remains high. While not a replacement for expert assessment, ChatGPT-4o may assist in settings with limited specialist access.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencechatgpt-4o diagnostic performancefracture detectionhip fracturepelvic x-ray

Identifiers

PMID40557058
PMCPMC12186573

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.