The Role of Google Gemini in the Interpretation of Ovarian Lesions.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 ACOUSTICS
Iason Psilopatis, Tibor A Zwimpfer, Viola Heinzelmann-Schwarz, Gwendolin Manegold-Brauer, Hubertina Reina
{"title":"The Role of Google Gemini in the Interpretation of Ovarian Lesions.","authors":"Iason Psilopatis, Tibor A Zwimpfer, Viola Heinzelmann-Schwarz, Gwendolin Manegold-Brauer, Hubertina Reina","doi":"10.1055/a-2913-4208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Multimodal large language models (LLMs) can process text and images to support diagnostic processes, yet their ability to apply standardized ovarian ultrasound classification systems remains unexplored. This study evaluates Google Gemini's performance with regard to interpreting ovarian ultrasound using the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) criteria (IOTA simple rules) compared to expert evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 30 ultrasound examinations from the University Hospital of Basel: 10 normal ovaries, 10 benign lesions, and 10 malignant lesions. Each examination included B-mode and Doppler images. Google Gemini was prompted to assess normal ovarian images for pathology and apply the O-RADS categories and IOTA simple rules to pathologic cases. Two blinded experts independently evaluated responses using the Global Quality Score (GQS, 1-5 scale). The reference standard was histopathology for pathologic cases and expert assessment for normal ovaries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Google Gemini achieved a mean GQS of 3 across all categories. The model mischaracterized 6/10 normal ovaries as pathologic. For benign lesions, 6/10 were incorrectly assigned to high-risk O-RADS categories (4-5) with frequent misidentification of malignant IOTA features. While 6/10 malignant cases were correctly identified (GQS 4-5), 3/10 were misclassified as benign (O-RADS 2, GQS 1). The remaining case of a mucinous borderline tumor was also misclassified by the LLM (O-RADS 3, GQS 1).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Google Gemini seems to not be ready for independent clinical application in ovarian ultrasound interpretation. Critical inconsistencies including overdiagnosis and dangerous misclassification of malignancies indicate the need for specialized, domain-specific models with rigorous validation before clinical implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":49400,"journal":{"name":"Ultraschall in Der Medizin","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultraschall in Der Medizin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2913-4208","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Multimodal large language models (LLMs) can process text and images to support diagnostic processes, yet their ability to apply standardized ovarian ultrasound classification systems remains unexplored. This study evaluates Google Gemini's performance with regard to interpreting ovarian ultrasound using the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) criteria (IOTA simple rules) compared to expert evaluation.

Methods: This retrospective study included 30 ultrasound examinations from the University Hospital of Basel: 10 normal ovaries, 10 benign lesions, and 10 malignant lesions. Each examination included B-mode and Doppler images. Google Gemini was prompted to assess normal ovarian images for pathology and apply the O-RADS categories and IOTA simple rules to pathologic cases. Two blinded experts independently evaluated responses using the Global Quality Score (GQS, 1-5 scale). The reference standard was histopathology for pathologic cases and expert assessment for normal ovaries.

Results: Google Gemini achieved a mean GQS of 3 across all categories. The model mischaracterized 6/10 normal ovaries as pathologic. For benign lesions, 6/10 were incorrectly assigned to high-risk O-RADS categories (4-5) with frequent misidentification of malignant IOTA features. While 6/10 malignant cases were correctly identified (GQS 4-5), 3/10 were misclassified as benign (O-RADS 2, GQS 1). The remaining case of a mucinous borderline tumor was also misclassified by the LLM (O-RADS 3, GQS 1).

Conclusion: Google Gemini seems to not be ready for independent clinical application in ovarian ultrasound interpretation. Critical inconsistencies including overdiagnosis and dangerous misclassification of malignancies indicate the need for specialized, domain-specific models with rigorous validation before clinical implementation.

谷歌在卵巢病变解释中的作用。
多模态大语言模型(llm)可以处理文本和图像以支持诊断过程,但其应用标准化卵巢超声分类系统的能力仍未得到探索。本研究使用卵巢附件报告和数据系统(O-RADS)和国际卵巢肿瘤分析(IOTA)标准(IOTA简单规则)与专家评估相比较,评估谷歌Gemini在解释卵巢超声方面的表现。方法:回顾性研究包括巴塞尔大学医院30例超声检查:10例正常卵巢,10例良性病变,10例恶性病变。每次检查包括b型和多普勒图像。谷歌提示Gemini对正常卵巢图像进行病理评估,并对病理病例应用O-RADS分类和IOTA简单规则。两名盲法专家使用全球质量评分(GQS, 1-5分)独立评估回应。病理病例参照组织病理学,正常卵巢参照专家评估。结果:b谷歌双子座在所有类别的平均GQS为3分。该模型将6/10的正常卵巢误诊为病理卵巢。对于良性病变,6/10被错误地划分为高风险的O-RADS类别(4-5),并且经常错误地识别恶性IOTA特征。6/10的恶性病例被正确识别(GQS 4-5), 3/10被误分类为良性(O-RADS 2, GQS 1)。其余1例粘液性交界性肿瘤也被LLM错误分类(O-RADS 3, GQS 1)。结论:谷歌Gemini在卵巢超声判读中尚不具备独立临床应用的条件。严重的不一致,包括过度诊断和恶性肿瘤的危险错误分类,表明需要在临床实施之前进行严格验证的专门领域特定模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ultraschall in Der Medizin
Ultraschall in Der Medizin 医学-核医学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
8.80%
发文量
228
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ultraschall in der Medizin / European Journal of Ultrasound publishes scientific papers and contributions from a variety of disciplines on the diagnostic and therapeutic applications of ultrasound with an emphasis on clinical application. Technical papers with a physiological theme as well as the interaction between ultrasound and biological systems might also occasionally be considered for peer review and publication, provided that the translational relevance is high and the link with clinical applications is tight. The editors and the publishers reserve the right to publish selected articles online only. Authors are welcome to submit supplementary video material. Letters and comments are also accepted, promoting a vivid exchange of opinions and scientific discussions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书