Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 31, 2025

Setting Up a Stroke Team Algorithm and Conducting Simulation-based Training in the Emergency Department - A Practical Guide
Published on: January 15, 2017
Evaluation of Advanced Artificial Intelligence Algorithms' Diagnostic Efficacy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A
Mustafa Koyun1, Ismail Taskent2
1Department of Radiology, Kastamonu Training and Research Hospital, Kastamonu 37150, Turkey.
Abstract:
Background/Objectives: Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a leading cause of mortality and disability worldwide, with early and accurate diagnosis being critical for timely intervention and improved patient outcomes. This retrospective study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of two advanced artificial intelligence (AI) models, Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT-4o) and Claude 3.5 Sonnet, in identifying AIS from diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). Methods: The DWI images of a total of 110 cases (AIS group: n = 55, healthy controls: n = 55) were provided to the AI models via standardized prompts. The models' responses were compared to radiologists' gold-standard evaluations, and performance metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy were calculated. Results: Both models exhibited a high sensitivity for AIS detection (ChatGPT-4o: 100%, Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 94.5%). However, ChatGPT-4o demonstrated a significantly lower specificity (3.6%) compared to Claude 3.5 Sonnet (74.5%). The agreement with radiologists was poor for ChatGPT-4o (κ = 0.036; %95 CI: -0.013, 0.085) but good for Claude 3.5 Sonnet (κ = 0.691; %95 CI: 0.558, 0.824). In terms of the AIS hemispheric localization accuracy, Claude 3.5 Sonnet (67.2%) outperformed ChatGPT-4o (32.7%). Similarly, for specific AIS localization, Claude 3.5 Sonnet (30.9%) showed greater accuracy than ChatGPT-4o (7.3%), with these differences being statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusions: This study highlights the superior diagnostic performance of Claude 3.5 Sonnet compared to ChatGPT-4o in identifying AIS from DWI. Despite its advantages, both models demonstrated notable limitations in accuracy, emphasizing the need for further development before achieving full clinical applicability. These findings underline the potential of AI tools in radiological diagnostics while acknowledging their current limitations.

