{"title":"Evaluation of ChatGPT-4o in Breast Cancer Screening: Insights from the 5th Edition BI-RADS Atlas and ACR Guidelines.","authors":"Bilgen Mehpare Özer, Eda Nur Korkmaz","doi":"10.1007/s10278-025-01663-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study is to evaluate the potential, reliability, and limitations of ChatGPT-4o in text-based questions and its effectiveness in clinical decision support processes based on the 5th edition of the BI-RADS Atlas and ACR breast cancer screening guidelines. In this study, a total of 100 questions-50 multiple-choice and 50 true/false-prepared by two radiologists were submitted to ChatGPT-4o between November 5 and 19. The answers provided by ChatGPT-4o were evaluated at baseline and 14 days later by both radiologists for accuracy and comprehensiveness using a Likert scale. Group comparisons were performed using Mann-Whitney U, Wilcoxon tests; response consistency was evaluated with Cohen's Kappa, and overall accuracy differences with a two-proportion z-test. The increase in overall accuracy from 86 to 95% was statistically significant according to the two-proportion z-test (p = .030). Comparisons between the two sessions revealed statistically significant increases in the accuracy (p = .013, r = .35, 95% CI [0.09, 0.61]) and comprehensiveness (p = .014, r = .35, 95% CI [0.09, 0.61]) rates of true/false questions. On the other hand, no significant difference was found between the accuracy (p = .180, r = .19, 95% CI [- 0.09, 0.47]) and comprehensiveness (p = .180, r = .19, 95% CI [- 0.09, 0.47]) rates of multiple-choice questions. In addition, group comparisons evaluating the effect of different question formats on performance revealed no significant difference in terms of accuracy (p = .661, r = - 0.04, 95% CI [- 0.23, 0.16]) and comprehensiveness (p = .708, r = - 0.04, 95% CI [- 0.23, 0.16]). The consistency of ChatGPT-4o responses was supported by Cohen's Kappa coefficients, all statistically significant (p < .001), with 95% confidence intervals ranging from - .038 to 1.084. ChatGPT-4o demonstrated remarkable performance in answering multiple-choice and true-false questions with overall accuracy improving from 86% in the first test to 95% after 14 days. ChatGPT-4o holds significant potential as a clinical decision support tool for healthcare professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":516858,"journal":{"name":"Journal of imaging informatics in medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of imaging informatics in medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-025-01663-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate the potential, reliability, and limitations of ChatGPT-4o in text-based questions and its effectiveness in clinical decision support processes based on the 5th edition of the BI-RADS Atlas and ACR breast cancer screening guidelines. In this study, a total of 100 questions-50 multiple-choice and 50 true/false-prepared by two radiologists were submitted to ChatGPT-4o between November 5 and 19. The answers provided by ChatGPT-4o were evaluated at baseline and 14 days later by both radiologists for accuracy and comprehensiveness using a Likert scale. Group comparisons were performed using Mann-Whitney U, Wilcoxon tests; response consistency was evaluated with Cohen's Kappa, and overall accuracy differences with a two-proportion z-test. The increase in overall accuracy from 86 to 95% was statistically significant according to the two-proportion z-test (p = .030). Comparisons between the two sessions revealed statistically significant increases in the accuracy (p = .013, r = .35, 95% CI [0.09, 0.61]) and comprehensiveness (p = .014, r = .35, 95% CI [0.09, 0.61]) rates of true/false questions. On the other hand, no significant difference was found between the accuracy (p = .180, r = .19, 95% CI [- 0.09, 0.47]) and comprehensiveness (p = .180, r = .19, 95% CI [- 0.09, 0.47]) rates of multiple-choice questions. In addition, group comparisons evaluating the effect of different question formats on performance revealed no significant difference in terms of accuracy (p = .661, r = - 0.04, 95% CI [- 0.23, 0.16]) and comprehensiveness (p = .708, r = - 0.04, 95% CI [- 0.23, 0.16]). The consistency of ChatGPT-4o responses was supported by Cohen's Kappa coefficients, all statistically significant (p < .001), with 95% confidence intervals ranging from - .038 to 1.084. ChatGPT-4o demonstrated remarkable performance in answering multiple-choice and true-false questions with overall accuracy improving from 86% in the first test to 95% after 14 days. ChatGPT-4o holds significant potential as a clinical decision support tool for healthcare professionals.