ArticleJournal of digital imaging2014
Mapping institution-specific study descriptions to RadLex Playbook entries.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Local clinical diagnostic reference levels for chest and abdomen CT examinations in adults as a function of body mass index and clinical indication: a prospective multicenter study.European radiology · 2019Article
- The LOINC RSNA radiology playbook - a unified terminology for radiology procedures.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Article
- Medical Image Data and Datasets in the Era of Machine Learning-Whitepaper from the 2016 C-MIMI Meeting Dataset Session.Journal of digital imaging · 2017Article
- Improving efficiency in the radiology department.Pediatric radiology · 2017Review
- Workflow Challenges of Enterprise Imaging: HIMSS-SIIM Collaborative White Paper.Journal of digital imaging · 2016Review
- Radiomics: Images Are More than Pictures, They Are Data.Radiology · 2016Article
- Mapping institution-specific study descriptions to RadLex Playbook entries.Journal of digital imaging · 2014Article
- Use of Radiology Procedure Codes in Health Care: The Need for Standardization and Structure.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, IncReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The naming of imaging procedures is currently not standardized across institutions. As a result, it is a challenge to establish national registries, for instance, a national registry of dose to facilitate comparisons among different types of CT procedures. RSNA's RadLex Playbook is an effort towards addressing this gap (by introducing a unique Playbook identifier called an RPID for each procedure), and the current research focuses on semi-automatically mapping institution-specific procedure descriptions to Playbook entries to assist with this standardization effort. We discuss an algorithm we have developed to facilitate the mapping process which first extracts RadLex codes from the procedure description and then uses the definition of an RPID to determine the most suitable RPID(s) for the extracted set of RadLex codes. We also developed a tool that has three modes of operations-a single procedure mapping mode that allows a user to map a single institution-specific procedure description to a Playbook entry, a bulk mode to process large number of descriptions, and an exploratory mode that assists a user to better understand how the selection of values for various Playbook attributes affects the resulting RPID. We validate our algorithms using 166 production CT procedure descriptions and discuss how the tool can be used by administrators to map institution-specific procedure descriptions to RPIDs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.