ArticleJournal of clinical practice and research2026
Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Models in Detecting Acute Knee Fractures on Radiographs:A Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of clinical practice and 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of closed-source, multimodal large language models (LLMs)-ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-4.5, and Gemini 2.5 Pro-in detecting acute knee fractures on radiographs compared with an emergency medicine specialist and a radiologist. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 252 patients who underwent both knee radiography and CT between September 2023 and July 2025. Fracture status was determined by CT and reviewed by radiologists. Anteroposterior and lateral radiographs were independently assessed by an emergency medicine specialist, a radiologist, and three LLMs. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC). Reliability was assessed using Cohen's kappa and McNemar's tests. Results: According to CT findings, fractures were present in 23.08% (n=58) of patients. The LLMs demonstrated low sensitivity: ChatGPT-4o, 37.9%; ChatGPT-4.5, 13.8%; and Gemini 2.5 Pro, 10.3%, with moderate overall accuracy (72-77%). In contrast, the radiologist achieved 92.1% accuracy, with high sensitivity (77.6%) and specificity (96.4%), whereas the emergency medicine specialist showed 83.7% accuracy. AUC comparisons revealed significantly higher diagnostic performance for clinicians, particularly radiologists, than for all LLMs (p<0.05). Consistency analysis showed moderate agreement for ChatGPT-4o, slight agreement for ChatGPT-4.5, and substantial agreement for Gemini 2.5 Pro. Conclusion: Closed-source LLMs performed worse than clinicians in diagnosing acute knee fractures on radiographs, with a high risk of missed fractures. Although they may support triage by reliably identifying normal cases, they are not sufficient for standalone diagnostic use.
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.