ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026
Spatial Validation of General-Purpose Multimodal AI-Generated Target Regions in Peripheral Nerve Block Ultrasound.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
General-purpose multimodal artificial intelligence (AI) systems can interpret medical images, but their spatial precision for procedural ultrasound has not been well characterized. This prospective image-based agreement study quantitatively evaluated target regions generated by GPT-4.5 on 100 pre-procedural ultrasound images for interscalene, supraclavicular, femoral, and popliteal sciatic nerve blocks. Three experienced anesthesiologists independently delineated target regions, and a consensus region served as the reference standard. Each image was assessed by the AI system in three separate sessions using a standardized prompt. Spatial agreement was evaluated using the Dice similarity coefficient, Jaccard index, centroid distance, and 95th percentile Hausdorff distance; study-specific expert ratings and repeatability were also assessed. For contextual benchmarking, median expert-expert Dice similarity was 0.88 (interquartile range, 0.84-0.89), and median AI-expert Dice similarity was 0.47 (0.38-0.57; p < 0.001 for the paired contextual comparison). The median Jaccard index was 0.31 (0.23-0.40), centroid distance was 6.85 mm (5.85-7.90), and 95th percentile Hausdorff distance was 10.55 mm (8.97-12.22). On the study-specific expert-rating scale, 41% of AI-generated regions received a score of 3 or higher, but only 5% were acceptable without modification. Repeatability was high (median Dice similarity, 0.93), indicating that reproducibility did not imply anatomical accuracy. General-purpose multimodal AI produced measurable but limited spatial agreement with expert-defined targets, supporting supervised evaluation or educational use rather than standalone procedural targeting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42844501What 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.