ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Automated generation of structured breast ultrasound reports using BreastViT and ChatGPT.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
backgroundBreast cancer is the most common malignancy in women. Ultrasound plays a critical role in dense breasts, and BI-RADS provides a standardized framework for lesion assessment. However, conventional reports may suffer from variability. Deep learning and large language models (LLMs) show promise in automated report generation. We propose a workflow integrating deep learning with GPT-4o for structured breast ultrasound reports. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively collected 2,243 ultrasound images from 362 patients (BI-RADS 4B, 4C, 5; 2019-2024). The proposed BreastViT model, a VisionEncoderDecoderModel (pretrained: nlpconnect/vit-gpt2-image-captioning), was compared against three baseline architectures: CNN-Transformer (R2Gen), CNN-Attention-LSTM, and CNN-RNN. Generated texts were refined by GPT-4o for language optimization and terminology standardization. An external validation set (49 cases, Oct-Dec 2024) compared three outputs: GPT-4o alone, BreastViT outputs, and BreastViT + GPT-4o.
resultsInternally, BreastViT achieved a best BLEU of 0.9187 and loss of 0.1277. GPT-4o refinement markedly improved fluency and structure. In external validation, GPT-4o alone produced natural language but occasional image inconsistencies; BreastViT outputs captured key findings but lacked structure; the combined approach yielded the best accuracy, completeness, and terminological consistency. In blinded radiologist evaluation, the BreastViT + GPT-4o reports were rated highest for structural integrity and terminology standardization. In the external validation, a blinded evaluation was conducted by three senior radiologists. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.8808; 95% CI: 0.86-0.90). Results indicated that the combined BreastViT + GPT-4o model achieved the highest scores across all categories, including Clinical Accuracy, Information Completeness, Structural Integrity, and Terminology Standardization (7.31 ± 0.94, 7.61 ± 0.66, 8.03 ± 0.93, 8.02 ± 0.98, respectively). These scores were significantly superior to those of the standalone models (all P < 0.05).
conclusionThe proposed BreastViT + GPT-4o workflow automatically generates clinically compliant structured breast ultrasound reports, which enhances readability and standardization. This approach can improve report consistency and efficiency, offering a promising pathway for clinical integration.
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.