BI-RADS BERT & Using Section Tokenization to Understand Radiology Reports.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiology reports are the main form of communication between radiologists and other clinicians, and contain important information for patient care. However in order to use this information for research it is necessary to convert the raw text into structured data suitable for analysis. Domain specific contextual word embeddings have been shown to achieve impressive accuracy at such natural language processing tasks in medicine. In this work we pre-trained a contextual embedding BERT model using breast radiology reports and developed a classifier that incorporated the embedding with auxiliary global textual features in order to perform a section tokenization task. This model achieved a 98% accuracy at segregating free text reports into sections of information outlined in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon, a significant improvement over the Classic BERT model without auxiliary information. We then evaluated whether using section tokenization improved the downstream extraction of the following fields: modality/procedure, previous cancer, menopausal status, purpose of exam, breast density and background parenchymal enhancement. Using the BERT model pre-trained on breast radiology reports combined with section tokenization resulted in an overall accuracy of 95.9% in field extraction. This is a 17% improvement compared to an overall accuracy of 78.9% for field extraction for models without section tokenization and with Classic BERT embeddings. Our work shows the strength of using BERT in radiology report analysis and the advantages of section tokenization in identifying key features of patient factors recorded in breast radiology reports.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".