MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229451765 · doi:10.3390/jimaging8050131

BI-RADS BERT and Using Section Segmentation to Understand Radiology Reports

2022· article· en· W4229451765 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Imaging · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersSimon Fraser UniversityCompute CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSunnybrook Research Institute
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceLexiconSentenceNatural language processingBreast imagingSection (typography)Classifier (UML)MammographyBreast cancerPattern recognition (psychology)MedicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiology reports are one of the main forms of communication between radiologists and other clinicians, and contain important information for patient care. In order to use this information for research and automated patient care programs, it is necessary to convert the raw text into structured data suitable for analysis. State-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) domain-specific contextual word embeddings have been shown to achieve impressive accuracy for these tasks in medicine, but have yet to be utilized for section structure segmentation. 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 section segmentation. This model achieved 98% accuracy in segregating free-text reports, sentence by sentence, into sections of information outlined in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon, which is a significant improvement over the classic BERT model without auxiliary information. We then evaluated whether using section segmentation improved the downstream extraction of clinically relevant information such as modality/procedure, previous cancer, menopausal status, purpose of exam, breast density, and breast MRI background parenchymal enhancement. Using the BERT model pre-trained on breast radiology reports, combined with section segmentation, resulted in an overall accuracy of 95.9% in the field extraction tasks. This is a 17% improvement, compared to an overall accuracy of 78.9% for field extraction with models using classic BERT embeddings and not using section segmentation. Our work shows the strength of using BERT in the analysis of radiology reports and the advantages of section segmentation by identifying the 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it