Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42091800›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026

Evaluating Large Language Models for Turkish Emergency CT Impression Drafting: Quality, Critical Omissions, and Readability.

Halil Tekdemir, Esra Çıvgın, Şebnem Akpınar, Ozan Ekici, Büşra Nur Tekdemir, Ali Bahadır Özdemir, Erdal Altaş, Alperen Sefa Toker, Ebru Şengül Parlak, İzzet Selçuk Parlak

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Halil TekdemirDepartment of Radiology, Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. haltek04726@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0726-0609
Esra ÇıvgınDepartment of Radiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Şebnem AkpınarDepartment of Radiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Ozan EkiciDepartment of Radiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Büşra Nur TekdemirDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.
Ali Bahadır ÖzdemirDepartment of Radiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Erdal AltaşDepartment of Radiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Alperen Sefa TokerDepartment of Radiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Ebru Şengül ParlakDepartment of Chest Diseases, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.
İzzet Selçuk ParlakDepartment of Radiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to compare large language models (LLMs) for drafting Turkish emergency CT impression text and to quantify quality, critical omission risk, and readability across anatomical regions. In this retrospective observational study, 1374 emergency CT reports were screened; 802 met inclusion criteria (abdomen 204, chest 200, cranial 198, head, and neck 200). Sections were provided to four LLMs (Grok-2, ChatGPT-4o-Latest, Gemini-2.0-Flash, DeepSeek-V3-FW) to generate impression drafts. Two radiologists rated impressions on a 4-point Likert scale. We recorded omissions of predefined critical findings by region and calculated the Ateşman readability index. Likert scores varied by model and region, with higher mean scores in head and neck and cranial examinations. Critical omissions were uncommon overall but showed model- and region-specific patterns; the highest omission rate occurred in abdominal CT for one model. Readability differed by text type, with radiologist impressions and higher-performing models generally showing similar and relatively high readability. LLM-generated Turkish CT impressions can reach acceptable quality in selected settings, but occasional critical omissions persist. These tools should be used as decision-support and require clinician oversight rather than standalone deployment.

Indexed as

Computed tomographyEmergency radiologyLarge language modelsRadiology reportingReadabilityTurkish language

Identifiers

PMID42091800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.