European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
Accuracy of general-purpose large language models (LLMS) in interpreting adolescent idiopathic scoliosis radiographs: a comparative study with experienced spine surgeons.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Avcı İdris, Kartal Salih Batuhan, Yavuz Ahmed Yasin, Paksoy Kemal, Yaman Onur
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study evaluates the accuracy of general-purpose, vision-capable large language models (LLMs) in interpreting adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) radiographs and compares their outputs with an expert surgeon consensus reference standard.
METHODS: This retrospective comparative diagnostic accuracy study analyzed 128 anonymized AIS radiographic case sets from 128 different patients, including standing coronal and sagittal radiographs and lateral bending films. ChatGPT GPT-5.2 Instant, Gemini 3 Flash, and Grok 4.1 were evaluated through their official web interfaces in January 2026 using the original standardized prompt based on the Lenke classification system. Model inputs were de-identified raw radiographs without measurement lines, Cobb values, vertebral labels, or Surgimap overlays. Three spine surgeons with more than 10 years of deformity surgery experience independently assessed all cases using Surgimap. Surgeon consensus was the reference standard. Cobb angle (CA) accuracy was assessed using mean absolute error and agreement within ± 5°; categorical variables were assessed by exact agreement with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: ChatGPT achieved 94.5% agreement within ± 5° of surgeon consensus, with a mean absolute CA error of 2.4°. Gemini achieved 92.2% agreement with a mean absolute error of 2.7°, and Grok achieved 90.6% agreement with a mean absolute error of 3.1°. Exact agreement was substantially lower for Lenke classification, lumbar and sagittal modifiers, neutral vertebra, and stable vertebra identification. Inter-rater reliability among surgeons was high for CA and categorical parameters. No formal inferential ranking between LLMs was performed.
CONCLUSION: The tested general-purpose LLM versions showed limited reliability for comprehensive AIS radiographic interpretation. Their performance was substantially weaker for Lenke classification, modifiers, and fusion-level-related landmarks than for CA estimation. The findings do not support independent use of these systems for scoliosis measurement, education, or surgical planning. At present, these tools should be regarded as supervised documentation or teaching aids rather than measurement or decision-making systems.
METHODS: This retrospective comparative diagnostic accuracy study analyzed 128 anonymized AIS radiographic case sets from 128 different patients, including standing coronal and sagittal radiographs and lateral bending films. ChatGPT GPT-5.2 Instant, Gemini 3 Flash, and Grok 4.1 were evaluated through their official web interfaces in January 2026 using the original standardized prompt based on the Lenke classification system. Model inputs were de-identified raw radiographs without measurement lines, Cobb values, vertebral labels, or Surgimap overlays. Three spine surgeons with more than 10 years of deformity surgery experience independently assessed all cases using Surgimap. Surgeon consensus was the reference standard. Cobb angle (CA) accuracy was assessed using mean absolute error and agreement within ± 5°; categorical variables were assessed by exact agreement with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: ChatGPT achieved 94.5% agreement within ± 5° of surgeon consensus, with a mean absolute CA error of 2.4°. Gemini achieved 92.2% agreement with a mean absolute error of 2.7°, and Grok achieved 90.6% agreement with a mean absolute error of 3.1°. Exact agreement was substantially lower for Lenke classification, lumbar and sagittal modifiers, neutral vertebra, and stable vertebra identification. Inter-rater reliability among surgeons was high for CA and categorical parameters. No formal inferential ranking between LLMs was performed.
CONCLUSION: The tested general-purpose LLM versions showed limited reliability for comprehensive AIS radiographic interpretation. Their performance was substantially weaker for Lenke classification, modifiers, and fusion-level-related landmarks than for CA estimation. The findings do not support independent use of these systems for scoliosis measurement, education, or surgical planning. At present, these tools should be regarded as supervised documentation or teaching aids rather than measurement or decision-making systems.