Evaluating ChatGPT-4's Performance in Identifying Radiological Anatomy in FRCR Part 1 Examination Questions

<b>Background</b> Radiology is critical for diagnosis and patient care, relying heavily on accurate image interpretation. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and natural language processing (NLP) have raised interest in the potential of AI models to support radiologists, although robust research on AI performance in this field is still emerging. <b>Objective</b> This study aimed to assess the efficacy of ChatGPT-4 in answering radiological anatomy questions similar to those in the Fellowship of the Royal College of Radiologists (FRCR) Part 1 Anatomy examination. <b>Materials and Methods</b> We used 100 mock radiological anatomy questions from a free Web site patterned after the FRCR Part 1 Anatomy examination. ChatGPT-4 was tested under two conditions: with and without context regarding the examination instructions and question format. The main query posed was: "Identify the structure indicated by the arrow(s)." Responses were evaluated against correct answers, and two expert radiologists (>5 and 30 years of experience in radiology diagnostics and academics) rated the explanation of the answers. We calculated four scores: correctness, sidedness, modality identification, and approximation. The latter considers partial correctness if the identified structure is present but not the focus of the question. <b>Results</b> Both testing conditions saw ChatGPT-4 underperform, with correctness scores of 4 and 7.5% for no context and with context, respectively. However, it identified the imaging modality with 100% accuracy. The model scored over 50% on the approximation metric, where it identified present structures not indicated by the arrow. However, it struggled with identifying the correct side of the structure, scoring approximately 42 and 40% in the no context and with context settings, respectively. Only 32% of the responses were similar across the two settings. <b>Conclusion</b> Despite its ability to correctly recognize the imaging modality, ChatGPT-4 has significant limitations in interpreting normal radiological anatomy. This indicates the necessity for enhanced training in normal anatomy to better interpret abnormal radiological images. Identifying the correct side of structures in radiological images also remains a challenge for ChatGPT-4.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Indian journal of radiology and imaging - new series/Indian journal of radiology and imaging/Indian Journal of Radiology & Imaging
Published
2024-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1792040
Citations
18
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.17
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating ChatGPT-4's Performance in Identifying Radiological Anatomy in FRCR Part 1 Examination Questions

Suvrankar Datta, Swaha Panda, Himel Mondal, Pradosh Kumar Sarangi et al.
18 citations
Indian journal of radiology and imaging - new series/Indian journal of radiology and imaging/Indian Journal of Radiology & Imaging
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
2.17
article

Evaluating ChatGPT-4's Performance in Identifying Radiological Anatomy in FRCR Part 1 Examination Questions

Suvrankar Datta, Swaha Panda, Himel Mondal, Pradosh Kumar Sarangi, Braja Behari Panda
article en
18 citations

Abstract

<b>Background</b> Radiology is critical for diagnosis and patient care, relying heavily on accurate image interpretation. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and natural language processing (NLP) have raised interest in the potential of AI models to support radiologists, although robust research on AI performance in this field is still emerging. <b>Objective</b> This study aimed to assess the efficacy of ChatGPT-4 in answering radiological anatomy questions similar to those in the Fellowship of the Royal College of Radiologists (FRCR) Part 1 Anatomy examination. <b>Materials and Methods</b> We used 100 mock radiological anatomy questions from a free Web site patterned after the FRCR Part 1 Anatomy examination. ChatGPT-4 was tested under two conditions: with and without context regarding the examination instructions and question format. The main query posed was: "Identify the structure indicated by the arrow(s)." Responses were evaluated against correct answers, and two expert radiologists (>5 and 30 years of experience in radiology diagnostics and academics) rated the explanation of the answers. We calculated four scores: correctness, sidedness, modality identification, and approximation. The latter considers partial correctness if the identified structure is present but not the focus of the question. <b>Results</b> Both testing conditions saw ChatGPT-4 underperform, with correctness scores of 4 and 7.5% for no context and with context, respectively. However, it identified the imaging modality with 100% accuracy. The model scored over 50% on the approximation metric, where it identified present structures not indicated by the arrow. However, it struggled with identifying the correct side of the structure, scoring approximately 42 and 40% in the no context and with context settings, respectively. Only 32% of the responses were similar across the two settings. <b>Conclusion</b> Despite its ability to correctly recognize the imaging modality, ChatGPT-4 has significant limitations in interpreting normal radiological anatomy. This indicates the necessity for enhanced training in normal anatomy to better interpret abnormal radiological images. Identifying the correct side of structures in radiological images also remains a challenge for ChatGPT-4.

Indian journal of radiology and imaging - new series/Indian journal of radiology and imaging/Indian Journal of Radiology & ImagingVol. 35(02)
Veer Surendra Sai Medical College and Hospital (IN), All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Deoghar (IN), Institute of Medical Sciences (IN), All India Institute of Medical Sciences (IN)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
2.17
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.