ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
A comparative accuracy study of multimodal LLMs, VLM and agent-based framework for pulmonary nodule detection on chest radiographs.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence technologies are being actively introduced in clinical practice. The most promising solutions are AI-assistants based on large language models (LLMs). Determining the feasibility of integrating such applications in clinical practice requires independent performance assessments. This study assessed accuracy of several multimodal LLMs in detecting pulmonary nodules on chest radiographs (CXR). Methods: This study included 9 models: Llama 3.2 Vision 90B, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, Gemini 2.0 Pro Experimental, Perplexity, CXR-LLaVA, XrayGPT, BiomedCLIP, MedRAX. Each model determined presence or absence of pulmonary nodules in dataset containing 100 CXR, 50 of which contained pulmonary nodules. ROC curves were constructed, diagnostic accuracy metrics were calculated. McNemar's test was used for pairwise accuracy comparisons. Results: Best results were achieved by MedRAX framework and BiomedCLIP vision-language model, with accuracy of 0.711 (95% CI 0.613-0.808). Among proprietary single-model LLMs, Claude 3.7 Sonnet demonstrated the best performance: accuracy 0.651 (0.548-0.753). Llama 3.2 Vision 90B, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 2.0 Pro Experimental demonstrated matching accuracy values: 0.602 (0.497-0.708). Conclusion: MedRAX framework and BiomedCLIP vision-language model showed the highest accuracy values. No statistically significant difference was observed between proprietary and open-source models, which may indicate potential for improving accuracy through refinement of open-source LLM-based models. Overall, accuracy values of evaluated models were insufficient for current clinical practice implementation. These results should be seen as exploratory given the small dataset size, single-centre design, different prompting strategies for foundation and domain-adapted models and use of PNG images instead of DICOM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.