ArticleBioMedicine2026
Assessing the capabilities of AI-based large language models (AI-LLMs) in interpreting histopathological slides and scientific figures: Performance evaluation study.
Article in BioMedicine, 2026. 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Integrating artificial intelligence-based large language models (AI-LLMs) into medical and other scientific domains is increasingly recognized as a tool to support complex tasks, such as interpreting histopathology slides and scientific figures. AI-LLMs can simplify these processes by providing clearer explanations. By improving accessibility and comprehension, AI-LLMs can significantly assist healthcare professionals in diagnosing and therapy determination. Students and the public also find it easier to understand complex scientific concepts and images. Objectives: This study explores the capability of AI-LLMs in interpreting histopathological slides and scientific images. This study aims to evaluate the performance of AI-LLMs in supporting diagnostics and improving comprehension in biomolecular sciences. Methods: The study was divided into two parts: interpreting histopathology slides and scientific figures. Twelve histopathology images and twelve scientific figures were tested on each of the three most frequently used chatbots (ChatGPT-4, Gemini Advanced, and Copilot). Responses from the chatbots were coded and blindly examined by expert raters using five parameters-relevance, clarity, depth, focus, and coherence-on a 5-point Likert scale. Statistical analysis included one-way ANOVA and multiple linear regression. Results: ChatGPT-4 outperformed Gemini Advanced and Copilot in histopathology and scientific image interpretation (P < 0.001) with significantly higher scores across all parameters (relevance, clarity, depth, focus, and coherence). ChatGPT-4's superior performance may be due to its advanced algorithms, extensive training data, specialized modules, and user feedback. Conclusions: ChatGPT-4 excels in interpreting histopathology and scientific images, which may lead to improving diagnostic accuracy, clinical decision-making, and reducing pathologists' workload. It also benefits education by enhancing students' understanding of complex images and promoting interactive learning. ChatGPT-4 shows a significant potential to improve patient care and enrich student learning.
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.