ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025
Trends and Trajectories in the Rise of Large Language Models in Radiology: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness, Safety, and Workflow Burden of Large Language Model-Based Medical Report Generation: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- End-to-End PET/CT Interpretation and Quantification with an LLM-Orchestrated AI Agent: A Real-World Pilot Study.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026Article
- Temporal Reproducibility of Fracture Interpretation in Forensic Radiography: A Multispecialty Comparison of Physicians and Vision Language Models Including Fracture Subtype Description.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Benchmarking Multimodal Large Language Models for Cardiopulmonary Findings on Chest Radiographs: Sex-Stratified Discrimination and Operating Characteristics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Large Language Model-Generated Differential Diagnoses in Radiology Education: Comparison with a Standard Casebook.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions of Large Language Models in Health Care Communication: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Japanese Clinical Note Styles Between Physicians and Large Language Models Using Identical Psychiatric Cases: Quantitative Text Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- AI at the Sella Turcica: Multi-Model Large Language Model Evaluation in Pituitary Adenomas.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence standardizes CT-based body composition analysis in breast cacer to address methodological heterogeneity.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of large language models (LLMs) in radiology is expanding rapidly, offering new possibilities in report generation, decision support, and workflow optimization. However, a comprehensive evaluation of their applications, performance, and limitations across the radiology domain remains limited. Objective: This review aimed to map current applications of LLMs in radiology, evaluate their performance across key tasks, and identify prevailing limitations and directions for future research. Methods: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the framework by Arksey and O'Malley framework and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Three databases-PubMed, ScopusCOPUS, and IEEE Xplore-were searched for peer-reviewed studies published between January 2022 and December 2024. Eligible studies included empirical evaluations of LLMs applied to radiological data or workflows. Commentaries, reviews, and technical model proposals without evaluation were excluded. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data on study characteristics, LLM type, radiological use case, data modality, and evaluation metrics. A thematic synthesis was used to identify key domains of application. No formal risk-of-bias assessment was performed, but a narrative appraisal of dataset representativeness and study quality was included. Results: A total of 67 studies were included. (n/N, %)GPT-4 was the most frequently used model (n=28, 42%), with text-based corpora as the primary type of data used (n=43, 64%). Identified use cases fell into three thematic domains: (1) decision support (n=39, 58%), (2) report generation and summarization (n=16, 24%), and (3) workflow optimization (n=12, 18%). While LLMs demonstrated strong performance in structured-text tasks (eg, report simplification with >94% accuracy), diagnostic performance varied widely (16%-86%) and was limited by dataset bias, lack of fine tuning, and minimal clinical validation. Most studies (n=53, 79.1%) had single-center, proof-of-concept designs with limited generalizability. Conclusions: LLMs show strong potential for augmenting radiological workflows, particularly for structured reporting, summarization, and educational tasks. However, their diagnostic performance remains inconsistent, and current implementations lack robust external validation. Future work should prioritize prospective, multicenter validation of domain-adapted and multimodal models to support safe clinical integration.
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.