ArticleEuropean radiology2026
Identification of high-priority radiology reports with unexpected findings using fine-tuned large language models.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) can accurately predict the urgency and severity of radiology reports. MATERIALS AND
methodsBased on the recommendations of the Academy of Royal Colleges, we defined radiology reports that include unexpected findings of high urgency or severity as "high-priority (HP) radiology reports." Overall, 1906 radiology reports were used as the training set, and 176 radiology reports were used as the test set, with a balanced ratio of HP to non-HP radiology reports (1:1) in both sets. Four types of LLMs (Llama2 7B, Llama3 8B, Llama3 Elyza 8B, and Llama 3.1 8B) were fine-tuned using four different input settings: (1) findings only, (2) findings + referring department, (3) findings + referring department + clinical diagnosis before examination, and (4) findings + referring department + clinical diagnosis before examination + details of examination request. The fine-tuned LLMs predicted whether each radiology report was HP or not.
resultsAmong the four LLMs, Llama3 Elyza 8B, with inputs comprising findings and the referring department, demonstrated the best performance, achieving PRAUC = 0.962, ROCAUC = 0.968, accuracy = 0.915, sensitivity/recall = 0.932, specificity = 0.898, and F1 = 0.916. Adding a clinical diagnosis before the examination and details of examination requests did not necessarily lead to performance improvement.
conclusionThe fine-tuned LLMs accurately predicted HP radiology reports, suggesting their potential utility in supporting communication regarding radiology reports with high urgency or severity. KEY POINTS: Question This study aims to evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) can accurately predict the high-priority (HP) radiology reports. Findings The fine-tuned best LLM accurately HP radiology reports, achieving PRAUC of 0.962 and ROCAUC of 0.968. Clinical relevance This study demonstrates that fine-tuned LLMs can accurately identify HP radiology reports, potentially improving timely clinical decision-making and enhancing patient safety through faster communication of critical findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41441998What 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.