ArticleJMIR AI2025
Enhancing Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Report Comprehension in Spinal Trauma: Readability Analysis of AI-Generated Explanations for Thoracolumbar Fractures.
Article in JMIR AI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large Language Models in Spine Surgery: A Scoping Review of Clinical Efficacy, Technical Integration, and Ethical Paradigms.Global spine journal · 2026Review
- Medical large language models and systems in the clinical application of spinal diseases: Current status, challenges, and future prospects.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026Review
- Patient Attitudes Toward Ambient Voice Technology: Preimplementation Patient Survey in an Academic Medical Center.JMIR medical informatics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports are challenging for patients to interpret and may subject patients to unnecessary anxiety. The advent of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4o, hold promise for translating complex medical information into layman terms. Objective: This paper aims to evaluate the accuracy, helpfulness, and readability of GPT-4o in explaining MRI reports of patients with thoracolumbar fractures. Methods: MRI reports of 20 patients presenting with thoracic or lumbar vertebral body fractures were obtained. GPT-4o was prompted to explain the MRI report in layman's terms. The generated explanations were then presented to 7 board-certified spine surgeons for evaluation on the reports' helpfulness and accuracy. The MRI report text and GPT-4o explanations were then analyzed to grade the readability of the texts using the Flesch Readability Ease Score (FRES) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) Scale. Results: The layman explanations provided by GPT-4o were found to be helpful by all surgeons in 17 cases, with 6 of 7 surgeons finding the information helpful in the remaining 3 cases. ChatGPT-generated layman reports were rated as "accurate" by all 7 surgeons in 11/20 cases (55%). In an additional 5/20 cases (25%), 6 out of 7 surgeons agreed on their accuracy. In the remaining 4/20 cases (20%), accuracy ratings varied, with 4 or 5 surgeons considering them accurate. Review of surgeon feedback on inaccuracies revealed that the radiology reports were often insufficiently detailed. The mean FRES score of the MRI reports was significantly lower than the GPT-4o explanations (32.15, SD 15.89 vs 53.9, SD 7.86; P<.001). The mean FKGL score of the MRI reports trended higher compared to the GPT-4o explanations (11th-12th grade vs 10th-11th grade level; P=.11). Conclusions: Overall helpfulness and readability ratings for AI-generated summaries of MRI reports were high, with few inaccuracies recorded. This study demonstrates the potential of GPT-4o to serve as a valuable tool for enhancing patient comprehension of MRI report findings.
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.