Using a Clinical Data Warehouse to Calculate and Present Key Metrics for the Radiology Department: Implementation and Performance Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to the importance of radiologic examinations, such as X-rays or computed tomography scans, for many clinical diagnoses, the optimal use of the radiology department is 1 of the primary goals of many hospitals. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to calculate the key metrics of this use by creating a radiology data warehouse solution, where data from radiology information systems (RISs) can be imported and then queried using a query language as well as a graphical user interface (GUI). METHODS: Using a simple configuration file, the developed system allowed for the processing of radiology data exported from any kind of RIS into a Microsoft Excel, comma-separated value (CSV), or JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) file. These data were then imported into a clinical data warehouse. Additional values based on the radiology data were calculated during this import process by implementing 1 of several provided interfaces. Afterward, the query language and GUI of the data warehouse were used to configure and calculate reports on these data. For the most common types of requested reports, a web interface was created to view their numbers as graphics. RESULTS: The tool was successfully tested with the data of 4 different German hospitals from 2018 to 2021, with a total of 1,436,111 examinations. The user feedback was good, since all their queries could be answered if the available data were sufficient. The initial processing of the radiology data for using them with the clinical data warehouse took (depending on the amount of data provided by each hospital) between 7 minutes and 1 hour 11 minutes. Calculating 3 reports of different complexities on the data of each hospital was possible in 1-3 seconds for reports with up to 200 individual calculations and in up to 1.5 minutes for reports with up to 8200 individual calculations. CONCLUSIONS: A system was developed with the main advantage of being generic concerning the export of different RISs as well as concerning the configuration of queries for various reports. The queries could be configured easily using the GUI of the data warehouse, and their results could be exported into the standard formats Excel and CSV for further processing.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".