Abstract
Objectives This study aims to assess the performance of OpenAI’s multimodal GPT-4, which can analyze both images and textual data (GPT-4V), in interpreting radiological images. It focuses on a range of modalities, anatomical regions, and pathologies to explore the potential of zero-shot generative-AI in enhancing diagnostic processes in radiology.
Methods We analyzed 230 anonymized emergency room diagnostic images, consecutively collected over one week, using GPT-4V. Modalities included ultrasound (US), computerized tomography (CT) and X-ray images. The interpretations provided by GPT-4V were then compared with those of senior radiologists. This comparison aimed to evaluate the accuracy of GPT-4V in recognizing the imaging modality, anatomical region, and pathology present in the images.
Results GPT-4V identified the imaging modality correctly in 100% of cases (221/221), the anatomical region in 87.1% (189/217), and the pathology in 35.2% (76/216).
However, the model’s performance varied significantly across different modalities, with anatomical region identification accuracy ranging from 60.9% (39/64) in US images to 97% (98/101) and 100% (52/52) in CT and X-ray images (p<0.001).
Similarly, Pathology identification ranged from 9.1% (6/66) in US images to 36.4% (36/99) in CT and 66.7% (34/51) for X-ray images (p <0.001).
These variations indicate inconsistencies in GPT-4V’s ability to interpret radiological images accurately.
Conclusion While the integration of AI in radiology, exemplified by multimodal GPT-4, offers promising avenues for diagnostic enhancement, the current capabilities of GPT-4V are not yet reliable for interpreting radiological images. This study underscores the necessity for ongoing development to achieve dependable performance in radiology diagnostics.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The IRB of Sheba Medical Center gave ethical approval for this work
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
1. Increased sample size: We have substantially increased the study's sample size to 230 cases ensuring over 50 cases per modality and a balance between pathologic and normal cases. 2.Methodological elaborations and transparency: The methods section has been extensively revised to provide greater detail and clarity. This includes a more precise definition of the criteria for case selection, ensuring the focus on "clear-cut" cases, and the detailing of the exact prompts used for the AI analysis. 3.Enhanced discussion on pathology diagnostic accuracy: We have deepened the discussion regarding the overall pathology diagnostic accuracy of GPT-4V. This includes detailed methods, results, and discussion sections, along with a newly added Table 3 and Figures 1-6, which demonstrate GPT-4V's performance, including the types of errors. 4.Enhanced literature review: The discussion now includes references to updated literature.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
