The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2396
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-06T12:02:26.584397Z
status: published
lens: g_space
sector: health
headline: Large language model-based simplification of breast imaging reports: a prospective multicentre study with 2965 patient-based evaluations
dek: Objective To compare patient perceptions of radiologist-written and artificial intelligence (AI)-generated simplifications of breast imaging reports in terms of simplicity, comprehensibility, empathy, and overall preference. Materials and methods In this prospective multicentre survey-based study, 10 anonymized breast imaging reports (5 ultrasound, 5 mammography; one BI-RADS category 1-5 per modality) were simplified by ChatGPT-4 within a 50-word limit. After assessment by a panel of 20 physicians, paired radiol…
gain_title: In a multicentre survey of 314 patients, ChatGPT-4 simplified breast imaging reports were preferred in 63.3% of 2,965 evaluations and rated simple by 70.0% versus 43.4% for radiologist-written reports.
problem_title: (none)
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: In a multicentre survey of 314 patients, ChatGPT-4 simplified breast imaging reports were preferred in 63.3% of 2,965 evaluations and rated simple by 70.0% versus 43.4% for radiologist-written reports.
gain_evidence: AI-generated reports were preferred in 63.3% (1876/2965) of evaluations. | High simplicity and comprehensibility scores (4-5) were more frequently assigned to AI reports than to radiologist-written reports (70.0% vs 43.4% and 68.1% vs 40.4%, respectively).
problem_reading: (none)
problem_evidence: (none)
quick_read: A prospective multicentre survey study had 314 patients compare paired breast imaging report summaries, one written by a radiologist and one simplified by ChatGPT-4. Across 2,965 evaluations, patients preferred the AI version 63.3% of the time (1,876 evaluations), without knowing which report came from which source.

Patients gave high simplicity scores (4-5 on a 5-point scale) to 70.0% of AI reports against 43.4% of radiologist-written ones. For comprehensibility, the figures were 68.1% versus 40.4%. Patients increasingly read their own radiology reports, which are often hard to understand.

Comprehensibility was the strongest predictor of preference in both directions. Higher comprehensibility scores for the AI report raised the odds of choosing it (score 4: adjusted OR 1.87), while higher scores for the radiologist report lowered them (score 4: adjusted OR 0.45). The authors support supervised, complementary use of AI summaries.
limitation: The study used only 10 anonymized breast imaging reports, each AI summary was limited to 50 words, and it measured patient perceptions rather than understanding or clinical outcomes.
tag: Evidence-backed gain
key_points: Ten anonymized breast imaging reports were used: five ultrasound and five mammography, covering BI-RADS categories 1 to 5 for each modality. | ChatGPT-4 simplified each report within a 50-word limit, and a panel of 20 physicians assessed the pairs before patient evaluation. | 314 patients produced 2,965 evaluations, rating simplicity, comprehensibility and empathy on a 5-point Likert scale and picking a preferred report. | The origin of each report was concealed and each pair was shown in randomized order. | AI reports were preferred in 63.3% of evaluations (1,876 of 2,965). | High simplicity scores went to 70.0% of AI reports versus 43.4% of radiologist-written ones; high comprehensibility scores went to 68.1% versus 40.4%. | In multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression, comprehensibility of the AI report (score 4: adjusted OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.08-3.23) increased odds of preferring AI.
rundown: The study was a survey of patients rather than a clinical trial of outcomes. It tested how patients perceived simplicity, comprehensibility and empathy in short summaries of breast ultrasound and mammography reports.

Reports were chosen to span BI-RADS categories 1 to 5 for each of the two imaging types. ChatGPT-4 rewrote them in no more than 50 words, and 20 physicians reviewed the AI and radiologist pairs before patients saw them.

Patients rated each pair blind and in randomized order. Mixed-effects logistic regression looked for factors tied to choosing the AI report. Comprehensibility was the strongest predictor, with higher radiologist-report comprehensibility cutting the odds of choosing AI (score 4: adjusted OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29-0.69).

The authors conclude that most patients preferred and found the AI versions clearer, and they back a complementary, supervised role for AI-generated summaries in clinical breast imaging.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | Insights into Imaging | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-026-02423-0 | 2026-11-02
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

61ff7cbef22bb1848e5b14e5c081ec8772c5eab4cb82dc60e081ad34b989ceed

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000