ArticleScientific reports2026
A workflow utilizing general-purpose large language models for efficient structuring and data mining of bone scintigraphy narratives.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Abstract
Whole-body bone scintigraphy is pivotal for skeletal evaluation in oncological monitoring, yet the unstructured nature of clinical reports impedes efficient data management and multicenter integration. This study aims to validate whether a clinical-logic-guided prompting framework can effectively constrain general-purpose large language models (LLMs) to achieve reliable structured information extraction from bone scintigraphy narratives without domain-specific fine-tuning, and to evaluate the performance of this workflow in real-world clinical scenarios. We first established a multicenter ground-truth dataset to benchmark four LLMs (DeepSeek-R1, DeepSeek-V3, GPT-o3, and Gemini 2.5 Pro), and DeepSeek-R1 demonstrated the highest accuracy and stability in structured extraction. Subsequently, using DeepSeek-R1, we executed two validation tasks. In a human-in-the-loop workflow, LLM assistance reduced manual processing time by 74.5%-82.6% while significantly enhancing accuracy. Furthermore, we constructed a bone metastasis atlas for eight common malignancies through the automated processing of data from initial 18,331 patients. Our study demonstrates that prompt engineering designed by clinical experts, integrating clinical logic and controlled vocabularies, can effectively guide general-purpose LLMs for bone scintigraphy narrative information extraction. This approach provides a validated low-code paradigm for physicians to transform medical narratives into analyzable structured data, thereby empowering large-scale clinical research.
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.