Abstract
Objectives
Accurate triage of lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) referrals for sciatica is important for patient assessment, diagnosis and surgical planning. This study evaluates the accuracy and speed of large language models (LLMs) in automatically vetting lumbar spine MRI referrals from general practice.
Methods
Three LLMs (GPT-4, Claude Opus, Gemini) were tasked with assigning an outcome (Accept – Routine, Accept – Urgent, Reject) and flagging MRI contraindications for lumbar spine referrals. Three prompts of increasing detail, including clinical guidelines and training examples, were used. Two radiology registrars synthesised 120 referrals, vetted by two board-certified radiologists, with a third resolving disagreements. Performance was assessed using accuracy, precision, recall and F1 scores.
Results
Inter-rater agreement between radiologists was substantial for vetting outcome (Cohen's κ = 0.76) and contraindication detection (κ = 0.68). Claude Opus with the full prompt achieved the highest accuracy (0.86) for vetting outcomes. GPT-4 with the instruction-only prompt achieved the highest F1 score (0.88) for contraindication detection. LLMs completed the task substantially faster than radiologists (9.8 ± 1.0 vs 135.0 ± 45.0 min).
Conclusions
LLMs demonstrate promising performance in vetting radiological referrals for sciatica, particularly with detailed context. All models identified all urgent referrals, suggesting potential for prioritising vetting worklists and improving timeliness of care.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
