ArticleCureus2026
The Effect of Structured Context on Chest Radiograph Interpretation by a Multimodal Large Language Model: A Pilot Comparative Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Multimodal large language models are increasingly discussed as potential adjuncts for medical image interpretation, yet the extent to which structured contextual guidance affects performance remains uncertain. Objective The aim of this study was to determine whether a structured contextual intervention improves ChatGPT performance on chest radiograph interpretation. Methods We conducted a comparative pilot study using 50 chest radiographs with established reference diagnoses. In the baseline condition, ChatGPT interpreted each image using only the standardized prompt, "Diagnose this X-ray image." In the structured-context condition, the model first reviewed a Radiopaedia-derived teaching module containing 100 labeled chest radiographs spanning 10 common diagnoses and then interpreted the same test set using an author-developed radiologic framework that emphasized study identification, image-quality assessment, systematic visual review, separation of findings from diagnostic impressions, explicit communication of uncertainty, and structured reporting. Performance was assessed with percent-correct scoring, with partial credit awarded when responses demonstrated appropriate reasoning but lacked full specificity. Results Overall accuracy improved from 28% at baseline to 62% after the structured-context intervention. Accuracy reached 100% for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pulmonary edema, and foreign body identification, and improved to 80% for pneumothorax, cardiomegaly, and pleural effusion. Performance remained limited for lung cancer (20%) and feeding tube placement (40%), and rib fractures were not identified in either condition. Accuracy for atelectasis declined from 40% to 20%. Conclusions Structured contextual guidance improved performance on selected chest radiograph tasks, but overall diagnostic reliability remained inadequate for independent clinical use. Larger studies with standardized scoring, external validation, and imaging-specific evaluation are needed.
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.