Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models for Translating Radiology Reports into Hindi.

IF 0.9 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging Pub Date : 2024-09-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1789618
Amit Gupta, Ashish Rastogi, Hema Malhotra, Krithika Rangarajan
{"title":"Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models for Translating Radiology Reports into Hindi.","authors":"Amit Gupta, Ashish Rastogi, Hema Malhotra, Krithika Rangarajan","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1789618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective</b>  The aim of this study was to compare the performance of four publicly available large language models (LLMs)-GPT-4o, GPT-4, Gemini, and Claude Opus-in translating radiology reports into simple Hindi. <b>Materials and Methods</b>  In this retrospective study, 100 computed tomography (CT) scan report impressions were gathered from a tertiary care cancer center. Reference translations of these impressions into simple Hindi were done by a bilingual radiology staff in consultation with a radiologist. Two distinct prompts were used to assess the LLMs' ability to translate these report impressions into simple Hindi. Translated reports were assessed by a radiologist for instances of misinterpretation, omission, and addition of fictitious information. Translation quality was assessed using Bilingual Evaluation Understudy (BLEU), Metric for Evaluation of Translation with Explicit ORdering (METEOR), Translation Edit Rate (TER), and character F-score (CHRF) scores. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the LLM performance across prompts. <b>Results</b>  Nine instances of misinterpretation and two instances of omission of information were found on radiologist evaluation of the total 800 LLM-generated translated report impressions. For prompt 1, Gemini outperformed others in BLEU ( <i>p</i>  < 0.001) and METEOR scores ( <i>p</i>  = 0.001), and was superior to GPT-4o and GPT-4 in TER and CHRF ( <i>p</i>  < 0.001), but comparable to Claude ( <i>p</i>  = 0.501 for TER and <i>p</i>  = 0.90 for CHRF). For prompt 2, GPT-4o outperformed all others ( <i>p</i>  < 0.001) in all metrics. Prompt 2 yielded better BLEU, METEOR, and CHRF scores ( <i>p</i>  < 0.001), while prompt 1 had a better TER score ( <i>p</i>  < 0.001). <b>Conclusion</b>  While each LLM's effectiveness varied with prompt wording, all models demonstrated potential in translating and simplifying radiology report impressions.</p>","PeriodicalId":51597,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","volume":"35 1","pages":"88-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11651845/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1789618","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective  The aim of this study was to compare the performance of four publicly available large language models (LLMs)-GPT-4o, GPT-4, Gemini, and Claude Opus-in translating radiology reports into simple Hindi. Materials and Methods  In this retrospective study, 100 computed tomography (CT) scan report impressions were gathered from a tertiary care cancer center. Reference translations of these impressions into simple Hindi were done by a bilingual radiology staff in consultation with a radiologist. Two distinct prompts were used to assess the LLMs' ability to translate these report impressions into simple Hindi. Translated reports were assessed by a radiologist for instances of misinterpretation, omission, and addition of fictitious information. Translation quality was assessed using Bilingual Evaluation Understudy (BLEU), Metric for Evaluation of Translation with Explicit ORdering (METEOR), Translation Edit Rate (TER), and character F-score (CHRF) scores. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the LLM performance across prompts. Results  Nine instances of misinterpretation and two instances of omission of information were found on radiologist evaluation of the total 800 LLM-generated translated report impressions. For prompt 1, Gemini outperformed others in BLEU ( p  < 0.001) and METEOR scores ( p  = 0.001), and was superior to GPT-4o and GPT-4 in TER and CHRF ( p  < 0.001), but comparable to Claude ( p  = 0.501 for TER and p  = 0.90 for CHRF). For prompt 2, GPT-4o outperformed all others ( p  < 0.001) in all metrics. Prompt 2 yielded better BLEU, METEOR, and CHRF scores ( p  < 0.001), while prompt 1 had a better TER score ( p  < 0.001). Conclusion  While each LLM's effectiveness varied with prompt wording, all models demonstrated potential in translating and simplifying radiology report impressions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging
Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
Revolutionizing Radiology: The Role of Large Language Models. Uncommon Neurosyphilis: Subacute Meningomyelitis with Distinctive "Candle Guttering Appearance". A Reflection of Our Role as Radiologists in India's Current Landscape of Infectious Diseases. Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models for Translating Radiology Reports into Hindi. Chronic Noninfectious Osteomyelitis: A Review of Imaging Findings.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1