ArticleBMC health services research2026
Enhancing bone metastasis CT report analysis: a comparison of local and proprietary large language models for privacy and resource efficiency.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
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
backgroundComputed tomography (CT) reports for patients with bone metastases include key clinical details, but they are usually written as free text. Different doctors write reports in different ways, which makes it hard to extract information in a consistent way. Large language models (LLMs) may help pull out important details automatically. But using external models can raise data privacy and management concerns in hospitals. This study looked at whether proprietary models and locally deployed open-source LLMs can help extract key diagnostic information and create structured reports in settings where data privacy is important.
methodsWe analyzed 300 CT reports of metastatic bone tumors and evaluated seven large language models, including proprietary and open-source systems. Tasks included identification of pathological fractures and extraction of fracture and metastatic sites. Expert annotations served as the reference standard. Model performance was assessed using accuracy, recall, precision, F1 score, area under the curve (AUC), and Cohen’s Kappa.
resultsAcross all three extraction tasks, accuracies ranged from 82% to 98%. Both proprietary and open-source models achieved high performance. Locally deployable models, including Qwen2-72B and WiNGPT2-9B, demonstrated performance levels within similar ranges to GPT-4o.
conclusionThe results show that open-source models can handle structured extraction of bone metastasis CT reports. Medically fine-tuned small-scale open-source models maintain stable performance while being more suitable for on-site deployment within healthcare institutions. This can help reduce data privacy risks. In the future, these models may help doctors make clinical decisions within health systems.
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.