MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406833305 · doi:10.2196/57275

Large Language Model Approach for Zero-Shot Information Extraction and Clustering of Japanese Radiology Reports: Algorithm Development and Validation

2025· article· en· W4406833305 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yosuke Yamagishi, Yuta Nakamura, Shouhei Hanaoka, Osamu Abe

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiology practices and education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceInformation extractionArtificial intelligenceMachine learningNatural language processingData miningInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The application of natural language processing in medicine has increased significantly, including tasks such as information extraction and classification. Natural language processing plays a crucial role in structuring free-form radiology reports, facilitating the interpretation of textual content, and enhancing data utility through clustering techniques. Clustering allows for the identification of similar lesions and disease patterns across a broad dataset, making it useful for aggregating information and discovering new insights in medical imaging. However, most publicly available medical datasets are in English, with limited resources in other languages. This scarcity poses a challenge for development of models geared toward non-English downstream tasks. Objective: This study aimed to develop and evaluate an algorithm that uses large language models (LLMs) to extract information from Japanese lung cancer radiology reports and perform clustering analysis. The effectiveness of this approach was assessed and compared with previous supervised methods. Methods: This study employed the MedTxt-RR dataset, comprising 135 Japanese radiology reports from 9 radiologists who interpreted the computed tomography images of 15 lung cancer patients obtained from Radiopaedia. Previously used in the NTCIR-16 (NII Testbeds and Community for Information Access Research) shared task for clustering performance competition, this dataset was ideal for comparing the clustering ability of our algorithm with those of previous methods. The dataset was split into 8 cases for development and 7 for testing, respectively. The study's approach involved using the LLM to extract information pertinent to lung cancer findings and transforming it into numeric features for clustering, using the K-means method. Performance was evaluated using 135 reports for information extraction accuracy and 63 test reports for clustering performance. This study focused on the accuracy of automated systems for extracting tumor size, location, and laterality from clinical reports. The clustering performance was evaluated using normalized mutual information, adjusted mutual information , and the Fowlkes-Mallows index for both the development and test data. Results: The tumor size was accurately identified in 99 out of 135 reports (73.3%), with errors in 36 reports (26.7%), primarily due to missing or incorrect size information. Tumor location and laterality were identified with greater accuracy in 112 out of 135 reports (83%); however, 23 reports (17%) contained errors mainly due to empty values or incorrect data. Clustering performance of the test data yielded an normalized mutual information of 0.6414, adjusted mutual information of 0.5598, and Fowlkes-Mallows index of 0.5354. The proposed method demonstrated superior performance across all evaluation metrics compared to previous methods. Conclusions: The unsupervised LLM approach surpassed the existing supervised methods in clustering Japanese radiology reports. These findings suggest that LLMs hold promise for extracting information from radiology reports and integrating it into disease-specific knowledge structures.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR CancerSame topicRadiology practices and educationFrench-language works237,207