RadioRAG: Online Retrieval-augmented Generation for Radiology Question Answering

Research output: Contribution to journalResearch articleContributedpeer-review

Contributors

  • Soroosh Tayebi Arasteh - , University Hospital Aachen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Stanford University (Author)
  • Mahshad Lotfinia - , University Hospital Aachen (Author)
  • Keno Bressem - , German Heart Centre Munich, Klinikum Rechts der Isar (MRI TUM) (Author)
  • Robert Siepmann - , University Hospital Aachen (Author)
  • Lisa Adams - , German Heart Centre Munich, Stanford University (Author)
  • Dyke Ferber - , Else Kröner Fresenius Center for Digital Health, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) Heidelberg (Author)
  • Christiane Kuhl - , University Hospital Aachen (Author)
  • Jakob Nikolas Kather - , Department of Internal Medicine I, Else Kröner Fresenius Center for Digital Health, National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) Heidelberg (Author)
  • Sven Nebelung - , University Hospital Aachen (Author)
  • Daniel Truhn - , University Hospital Aachen (Author)

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate diagnostic accuracy of various large language models (LLMs) when answering radiology-specific questions with and without access to additional online, up-to-date information via retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). Materials and Methods The authors developed radiology RAG (RadioRAG), an end-to-end framework that retrieves data from authoritative radiologic online sources in real-time. RAG incorporates information retrieval from external sources to supplement the initial prompt, grounding the model's response in relevant information. Using 80 questions from the RSNA Case Collection across radiologic subspecialties and 24 additional expert-curated questions with reference standard answers, LLMs (GPT-3.5-turbo [OpenAI], GPT-4, Mistral 7B, Mixtral 8×7B [Mistral], and Llama3-8B and -70B [Meta]) were prompted with and without RadioRAG in a zero-shot inference scenario (temperature ≤ 0.1, top-p = 1). RadioRAG retrieved context-specific information from www.radiopaedia.org. Accuracy of LLMs with and without RadioRAG in answering questions from each dataset was assessed. Statistical analyses were performed using bootstrapping while preserving pairing. Additional assessments included comparison of model with human performance and comparison of time required for conventional versus RadioRAG-powered question answering. Results RadioRAG improved accuracy for some LLMs, including GPT-3.5-turbo (74% [59 of 80] vs 66% [53 of 80], false discovery rate [FDR] = 0.03) and Mixtral 8×7B (76% [61 of 80] vs 65% [52 of 80], FDR = 0.02) on the RSNA radiology question answering (RSNA-RadioQA) dataset, with similar trends in the ExtendedQA dataset. Accuracy exceeded that of a human expert (63% [50 of 80], FDR ≤ 0.007) for these LLMs, although not for Mistral 7B-instruct-v0.2, Llama3-8B, and Llama3-70B (FDR ≥ 0.21). RadioRAG reduced hallucinations for all LLMs (rate, 6%-25%). RadioRAG increased estimated response time fourfold. Conclusion RadioRAG shows potential to improve LLM accuracy and factuality in radiology QA by integrating real-time, domain-specific data. Keywords: Retrieval-augmented Generation, Informatics, Computer-aided Diagnosis, Large Language Models Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2025.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere240476
JournalRadiology: Artificial Intelligence
Volume7
Issue number4
Early online date18 Jun 2025
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2025
Peer-reviewedYes

External IDs

unpaywall 10.1148/ryai.240476
Scopus 105013604101
ORCID /0000-0002-3730-5348/work/198594691

Keywords

Keywords

  • Humans, Radiology/education, Information Storage and Retrieval/methods, Internet