The Influence of Large Language Model-Generated Artificial Intelligence Risk Estimates on Clinical Decision-Making in Breast Imaging: A Simulation-Based Study.

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ebru Dusunceli Atman, Sena Bozer Uludag, Çağlar Uzun, Gizem Agaran, Zeynep Eskalen, Kazim Burak Karaca
{"title":"The Influence of Large Language Model-Generated Artificial Intelligence Risk Estimates on Clinical Decision-Making in Breast Imaging: A Simulation-Based Study.","authors":"Ebru Dusunceli Atman, Sena Bozer Uludag, Çağlar Uzun, Gizem Agaran, Zeynep Eskalen, Kazim Burak Karaca","doi":"10.3390/diagnostics16193241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as decision-support tools in radiology, yet their influence on clinical decision-making remains a significant concern. This study evaluates how artificial intelligence (AI)-generated malignancy risk estimates influence clinical decisions in breast imaging and assesses automation bias (AB) among radiology residents at different training levels. <b>Methods:</b> In this simulation-based study, 20 residents reviewed radiology reports for 15 synthetic breast imaging cases generated by ChatGPT-4 Turbo, each presented in either a concordant or discordant format. Participants were stratified into two groups based on their completion of a breast imaging rotation and evaluated each case by assigning a BI-RADS score, recommending management, and rating their confidence in the AI risk estimate. Diagnostic accuracy and independent predictors of AB were analyzed using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) to account for reader-level clustering. <b>Results:</b> Overall management accuracy was significantly lower in cases with discordant AI outputs (<i>p</i> = 0.008). A similar, albeit non-significant, decreasing trend was observed for BI-RADS accuracy. While advanced residents maintained high management accuracy regardless of AI concordance, early-stage residents showed a sharp decline in discordant cases (77.3% vs. 45.3%; <i>p</i> = 0.006). This decline was most critical in malignant cases for early-stage residents, where accuracy dropped from 92.0% to 48.0% (<i>p</i> < 0.001). In the multivariable GEE logistic regression model, training level was the only independent predictor of AB (OR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.03-0.28, <i>p</i> < 0.001). <b>Conclusions:</b> In this simulation study, advanced clinical training was associated with lower susceptibility to AB in breast imaging, although training level alone is unlikely to be a sufficient safeguard. Safe integration of AI tools will require caution among junior trainees alongside system-level measures such as model transparency and institutional oversight.</p>","PeriodicalId":11225,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostics","volume":"16 19","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13664299/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics16193241","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as decision-support tools in radiology, yet their influence on clinical decision-making remains a significant concern. This study evaluates how artificial intelligence (AI)-generated malignancy risk estimates influence clinical decisions in breast imaging and assesses automation bias (AB) among radiology residents at different training levels. Methods: In this simulation-based study, 20 residents reviewed radiology reports for 15 synthetic breast imaging cases generated by ChatGPT-4 Turbo, each presented in either a concordant or discordant format. Participants were stratified into two groups based on their completion of a breast imaging rotation and evaluated each case by assigning a BI-RADS score, recommending management, and rating their confidence in the AI risk estimate. Diagnostic accuracy and independent predictors of AB were analyzed using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) to account for reader-level clustering. Results: Overall management accuracy was significantly lower in cases with discordant AI outputs (p = 0.008). A similar, albeit non-significant, decreasing trend was observed for BI-RADS accuracy. While advanced residents maintained high management accuracy regardless of AI concordance, early-stage residents showed a sharp decline in discordant cases (77.3% vs. 45.3%; p = 0.006). This decline was most critical in malignant cases for early-stage residents, where accuracy dropped from 92.0% to 48.0% (p < 0.001). In the multivariable GEE logistic regression model, training level was the only independent predictor of AB (OR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.03-0.28, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this simulation study, advanced clinical training was associated with lower susceptibility to AB in breast imaging, although training level alone is unlikely to be a sufficient safeguard. Safe integration of AI tools will require caution among junior trainees alongside system-level measures such as model transparency and institutional oversight.

大语言模型生成的人工智能风险评估对乳腺影像学临床决策的影响:一项基于模拟的研究。
背景/目的:大型语言模型(LLMs)越来越多地被用作放射学中的决策支持工具,但它们对临床决策的影响仍然值得关注。本研究评估了人工智能(AI)生成的恶性肿瘤风险评估如何影响乳腺成像的临床决策,并评估了不同培训水平的放射科住院医生的自动化偏差(AB)。方法:在这项基于模拟的研究中,20名住院医生回顾了ChatGPT-4 Turbo生成的15例合成乳房成像病例的放射学报告,每例报告均以一致或不一致的格式呈现。参与者根据乳房成像轮换的完成情况分为两组,并通过分配BI-RADS评分、建议管理和评估他们对AI风险评估的信心来评估每个病例。使用广义估计方程(GEE)分析AB的诊断准确性和独立预测因子,以解释读者水平的聚类。结果:人工智能输出不一致的情况下,总体管理准确性显著降低(p = 0.008)。BI-RADS的准确性也有类似的下降趋势,尽管不显著。在不考虑AI一致性的情况下,高级住院医师的管理准确性较高,而早期住院医师的不一致性病例急剧下降(77.3% vs. 45.3%; p = 0.006)。这种下降在早期恶性病例中最为关键,准确率从92.0%下降到48.0% (p < 0.001)。在多变量GEE logistic回归模型中,训练水平是AB的唯一独立预测因子(OR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.03-0.28, p < 0.001)。结论:在这项模拟研究中,高级临床培训与乳腺成像中AB易感性降低相关,尽管单独的培训水平不太可能成为足够的保障。人工智能工具的安全整合需要初级学员的谨慎态度,以及模型透明度和机构监督等系统级措施。
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
Diagnostics
Diagnostics Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Clinical Biochemistry
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
2699
审稿时长
19.64 days
期刊介绍: Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418) is an international scholarly open access journal on medical diagnostics. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications and short notes on the research and development of medical diagnostics. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental and/or methodological details must be provided for research articles.
×
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