MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290975873 · doi:10.2196/38178

One Clinician Is All You Need–Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Measurement Extraction: Deep Learning Algorithm Development

2022· article· en· W4290975873 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pulkit Singh, Julian S. Haimovich, Christopher Reeder, Shaan Khurshid, Emily S. Lau, Jonathan W. Cunningham, Anthony Philippakis, Christopher D. Anderson, Jennifer E. Ho, Steven A. Lubitz, Puneet Batra

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsComputer scienceHeuristicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningAnnotationData extractionTransformerF1 scoreNatural language processingMagnetic resonance imagingAlgorithmData miningMedicineMEDLINERadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is a powerful diagnostic modality that provides detailed quantitative assessment of cardiac anatomy and function. Automated extraction of CMR measurements from clinical reports that are typically stored as unstructured text in electronic health record systems would facilitate their use in research. Existing machine learning approaches either rely on large quantities of expert annotation or require the development of engineered rules that are time-consuming and are specific to the setting in which they were developed. Objective We hypothesize that the use of pretrained transformer-based language models may enable label-efficient numerical extraction from clinical text without the need for heuristics or large quantities of expert annotations. Here, we fine-tuned pretrained transformer-based language models on a small quantity of CMR annotations to extract 21 CMR measurements. We assessed the effect of clinical pretraining to reduce labeling needs and explored alternative representations of numerical inputs to improve performance. Methods Our study sample comprised 99,252 patients that received longitudinal cardiology care in a multi-institutional health care system. There were 12,720 available CMR reports from 9280 patients. We adapted PRAnCER (Platform Enabling Rapid Annotation for Clinical Entity Recognition), an annotation tool for clinical text, to collect annotations from a study clinician on 370 reports. We experimented with 5 different representations of numerical quantities and several model weight initializations. We evaluated extraction performance using macroaveraged F1-scores across the measurements of interest. We applied the best-performing model to extract measurements from the remaining CMR reports in the study sample and evaluated established associations between selected extracted measures with clinical outcomes to demonstrate validity. Results All combinations of weight initializations and numerical representations obtained excellent performance on the gold-standard test set, suggesting that transformer models fine-tuned on a small set of annotations can effectively extract numerical quantities. Our results further indicate that custom numerical representations did not appear to have a significant impact on extraction performance. The best-performing model achieved a macroaveraged F1-score of 0.957 across the evaluated CMR measurements (range 0.92 for the lowest-performing measure of left atrial anterior-posterior dimension to 1.0 for the highest-performing measures of left ventricular end systolic volume index and left ventricular end systolic diameter). Application of the best-performing model to the study cohort yielded 136,407 measurements from all available reports in the study sample. We observed expected associations between extracted left ventricular mass index, left ventricular ejection fraction, and right ventricular ejection fraction with clinical outcomes like atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and mortality. Conclusions This study demonstrated that a domain-agnostic pretrained transformer model is able to effectively extract quantitative clinical measurements from diagnostic reports with a relatively small number of gold-standard annotations. The proposed workflow may serve as a roadmap for other quantitative entity extraction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.304
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207