Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41031068›Full record

ArticleArXiv2024

How Well Do Multi-modal LLMs Interpret CT Scans? An Auto-Evaluation Framework for Analyses.

Qingqing Zhu, Benjamin Hou, Tejas Sudarshan Mathai, Pritam Mukherjee, Qiao Jin, Xiuying Chen, Zhizheng Wang, Ruida Cheng, Ronald M Summers, Zhiyong Lu

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Qingqing ZhuNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine.
Benjamin HouImaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Clinical Center.
Tejas Sudarshan MathaiImaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Clinical Center.
Pritam MukherjeeImaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Clinical Center.
Qiao JinNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine.
Xiuying ChenKing Abdullah University of Science & Technology.
Zhizheng WangNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine.
Ruida ChengCenter for Information Technology, National Institutes of Health.
Ronald M SummersImaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Clinical Center.
Zhiyong LuNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automatically interpreting CT scans can ease the workload of radiologists. However, this is challenging mainly due to the scarcity of adequate datasets and reference standards for evaluation. This study aims to bridge this gap by introducing a novel evaluation framework, named "GPTRadScore". This framework assesses the capabilities of multi-modal LLMs, such as GPT-4 with Vision (GPT-4V), Gemini Pro Vision, LLaVA-Med, and RadFM, in generating descriptions for prospectively-identified findings. By employing a decomposition technique based on GPT-4, GPTRadScore compares these generated descriptions with gold-standard report sentences, analyzing their accuracy in terms of body part, location, and type of finding. Evaluations demonstrated a high correlation with clinician assessments and highlighted its potential over traditional metrics, such as BLEU, METEOR, and ROUGE. Furthermore, to contribute to future studies, we plan to release a benchmark dataset annotated by clinicians. Using GPTRadScore, we found that while GPT-4V and Gemini Pro Vision fare better, their performance revealed significant areas for improvement, primarily due to limitations in the dataset used for training these models. To demonstrate this potential, RadFM was fine-tuned and it resulted in significant accuracy improvements: location accuracy rose from 3.41% to 12.8%, body part accuracy from 29.12% to 53%, and type accuracy from 9.24% to 30%, thereby validating our hypothesis.

Identifiers

PMID41031068
PMCPMC12478437

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.