Cited by 115Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationTopic ModelingMachine Learning in Healthcare

Performance of an Open-Source Large Language Model in Extracting Information from Free-Text Radiology Reports

Open access
Le Guellec, Bastien, Lefèvre, Alexandre, Geay, Charlotte, Shorten, Lucas, Bruge, Cyril, Hacein-Bey, Lotfi, Amouyel, Philippe, Pruvo, Jean-Pierre +2 more·2024·Radiology: Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

“Just Accepted” papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in Radiology: Artificial Intelligence. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content. Purpose To assess the performance of a local open-source large language model (LLM) on various information extraction tasks from real-life emergency brain MRI reports. Materials and Methods All consecutive emergency brain MRI reports written in 2022 from a French quaternary center were retrospectively reviewed. Two radiologists identified MRIs that were performed for headaches. Four radiologists scored reports' conclusions as normal or abnormal. Abnormalities were labeled as either headache-causing or incidental. Vicuna, an open-source LLM, performed the same tasks. Vicuna’s performance metrics were evaluated using the radiologists’ consensus as the reference standard. Results Among the 2398 reports during the study period, radiologists identified 595 that included headaches in their indication (median age of patients, 35 years [IQR, 26–51], 68% (403/595) female). A positive finding was reported in 227/595 (38%) cases, 136 of which could explain the headache. The LLM had a sensitivity/specificity (95%CI), respectively, of 98% (583/595)(97–99)/99% (1791/1803)(99–100) for detecting the presence of headache in the clinical context, 99% (514/517)(98–100)/99% (68/69)(92–100) for the use of contrast medium injection, 97% (219/227)(93–99)/99% (364/368)(97–100) for study categorization as normal or abnormal and 88% (120/136)(82– 93)/73% (66/91)(62–81) for causal inference between MRI findings and headache. Conclusion An open-source LLM was able to extract information from free-text radiology reports with excellent accuracy without requiring further training. ©RSNA, 2024

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/ryai.230364

Cites

28 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [17]Zheng L, Chiang WL, Sheng Y, et al. Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena. ArXiv 2306.05685 [preprint] https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.05685. Posted June 9, 2023. Accessed May 29, 2024. · arXiv
  2. [19]Agrawal M, Hegselmann S, Lang H, Kim Y, Sontag D. Large Language Models are Few-Shot Clinical Information Extractors. ArXiv 2205.12689 [preprint] https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.12689. Posted May 25, 2022. Accessed May 29, 2024. · arXiv
  3. [21]Gutiérrez BJ, McNeal N, Washington C, et al. Thinking about GPT-3 In-Context Learning for Biomedical IE? Think Again. ArXiv 2203.08410 [preprint] https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.08410. Posted March 16, 2022. Accessed May 29, 2024. · arXiv
  4. [22]Gero Z, Singh C, Cheng H, et al. Self-Verification Improves Few-Shot Clinical Information Extraction. ArXiv 2306.00024 [preprint] https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.00024. Posted May 30, 2023. Accessed May 29, 2024. · arXiv
  5. [36]Lai VD, Ngo NT, Ben Veyseh AP, et al. ChatGPT Beyond English: Towards a Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models in Multilingual Learning. ArXiv 2304.05613 [preprint] https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05613. Posted April 12, 2023. Accessed May 29, 2024. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Le Guellec, B., Lefèvre, A., Geay, C., Shorten, L., Bruge, C., Hacein-Bey, L., Amouyel, P., Pruvo, J.-P., Kuchcinski, G., & Hamroun, A.
Affiliations
Inserm (FR)
Venue
Radiology: Artificial Intelligence
Published
2024-07-01
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
e230364-e230364
ISSN
2638-6100 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4396722287
Cited by
115
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 1
FWCI
10.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Radiology Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • LillOA (Université de Lille (University Of Lille)) (submittedVersion)
  • LillOA (Université de Lille (University Of Lille)) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
Keywords
open-source large language models, vicuña, headache, contrast medium injection, incidental finding, radiologist consensus, local LLM deployment, radiology education, radiology workforce shortage
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Headache, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Natural Language Processing, Retrospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review