ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2026
Large language models for lumbar spondylolisthesis detection: a multi-center pilot comparative radiographic accuracy study.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLumbar spondylolisthesis remains a radiographic diagnosis. With the improvement of large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, in interpreting multimodal images, many patients have turned to LLMs for diagnostic insight. Yet the diagnostic reliability of emerging LLMs for spinal pathologies remains understudied. This study sought to evaluate the performance of both ChatGPT-4o and ChatGPT-5 in detecting lumbar spondylolisthesis on standing lateral lumbar radiographs from a public imaging dataset evaluated by expert spine surgeon consensus.
methodsFrom the VinDr-SpineXR dataset library, we extracted 200 standing lateral lumbar radiographs, including 100 labeled as spondylolisthesis-positive and 100 labeled as spondylolisthesis-negative. Five fellowship-trained spine surgeons independently reviewed all 200 radiographs. Expert consensus was defined as agreement by at least three surgeons. These same 200 radiographs were independently analyzed by GPT-4o and GPT-5 using a standardized binary prompt to assess presence or absence of spondylolisthesis. Diagnostic performance was assessed relative to expert surgeon consensus.
resultsAfter spine surgeon consensus was established, spondylolisthesis was confirmed in 81% of VinDr-SpineXR spondylolisthesis-labeled positive radiographs, while 2% of VinDr-SpineXR spondylolisthesis-labeled negative radiographs were reclassified as positive. With expert surgeon consensus set as ground truth, ChatGPT-5 outperformed ChatGPT-4o evidenced by higher sensitivity (67.5% vs. 49.4%) and overall accuracy (61.5% vs. 55.5%), with minor difference in specificity (57.3% vs. 59.8%). Inter-rater agreement was higher with ChatGPT-5 (κ = 0.238) than GPT-4o (κ = 0.091).
conclusionsChatGPT-5 outperformed ChatGPT-4o in detecting lumbar spondylolisthesis. Yet, both LLMs remained limited compared to fellowship trained spine surgeons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42593567What 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.