Ontologies in the New Computational Age of Radiology: RadLex for Semantics and Interoperability in Imaging Workflows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From basic research to the bedside, precise terminology is key to advancing medicine and ensuring optimal and appropriate patient care. However, the wide spectrum of diseases and their manifestations superimposed on medical team–specific and discipline-specific communication patterns often impairs shared understanding and the shared use of common medical terminology. Common terms are currently used in medicine to ensure interoperability and facilitate integration of biomedical information for clinical practice and emerging scientific and educational applications alike, from database integration to supporting basic clinical operations such as billing. Such common terminologies can be provided in ontologies, which are formalized representations of knowledge in a particular domain. Ontologies unambiguously specify common concepts and describe the relationships between those concepts by using a form that is mathematically precise and accessible to humans and machines alike. RadLex® is a key RSNA initiative that provides a shared domain model, or ontology, of radiology to facilitate integration of information in radiology education, clinical care, and research. As the contributions of the computational components of common radiologic workflows continue to increase with the ongoing development of big data, artificial intelligence, and novel image analysis and visualization tools, the use of common terminologies is becoming increasingly important for supporting seamless computational resource integration across medicine. This article introduces ontologies, outlines the fundamental semantic web technologies used to create and apply RadLex, and presents examples of RadLex applications in everyday radiology and research. It concludes with a discussion of emerging applications of RadLex, including artificial intelligence applications. © RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".