MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327718568 · doi:10.1200/cci.22.00153

Using Recurrent Neural Networks to Extract High-Quality Information From Lung Cancer Screening Computerized Tomography Reports for Inter-Radiologist Audit and Feedback Quality Improvement

2023· article· en· W4327718568 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Clinical Cancer Informatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiology practices and education
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteSinai Health SystemPrincess Margaret Cancer CentrePublic Health OntarioToronto General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical physicsAuditLung cancerMedicineRadiologyQuality (philosophy)Quality managementComputer scienceTomographyComputed tomographyArtificial intelligenceOncologyEngineeringOperations managementBusinessAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Lung cancer screening programs generate a high volume of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reports that contain valuable information, typically in a free-text format. High-performance named-entity recognition (NER) models can extract relevant information from these reports automatically for inter-radiologist quality control. METHODS: Using LDCT report data from a longitudinal lung cancer screening program (8,305 reports; 3,124 participants; 2006-2019), we trained a rule-based model and two bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi-LSTM) NER neural network models to detect clinically relevant information from LDCT reports. Model performance was tested using F1 scores and compared with a published open-source radiology NER model (Stanza) in an independent evaluation set of 150 reports. The top performing model was applied to a data set of 6,948 reports for an inter-radiologist quality control assessment. RESULTS: The best performing model, a Bi-LSTM NER recurrent neural network model, had an overall F1 score of 0.950, which outperformed Stanza (F1 score = 0.872) and a rule-based NER model (F1 score = 0.809). Recall (sensitivity) for the best Bi-LSTM model ranged from 0.916 to 0.991 for different entity types; precision (positive predictive value) ranged from 0.892 to 0.997. Test performance remained stable across time periods. There was an average of a 2.86-fold difference in the number of identified entities between the most and the least detailed radiologists. CONCLUSION: We built an open-source Bi-LSTM NER model that outperformed other open-source or rule-based radiology NER models. This model can efficiently extract clinically relevant information from lung cancer screening computerized tomography reports with high accuracy, enabling efficient audit and feedback to improve quality of patient care.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.309 · 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