Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35925429›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2022

Automated vetting of radiology referrals: exploring natural language processing and traditional machine learning approaches.

Jaka Potočnik, Edel Thomas, Ronan Killeen, Shane Foley, Aonghus Lawlor, John Stowe

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jaka PotočnikUniversity College Dublin School of Medicine, Dublin, Ireland. jaka.potocnik@ucd.ie.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8353-1215
Edel ThomasUniversity College Dublin School of Medicine, Dublin, Ireland.
Ronan KilleenUniversity College Dublin School of Medicine, Dublin, Ireland.
Shane FoleyUniversity College Dublin School of Medicine, Dublin, Ireland.
Aonghus LawlorUniversity College Dublin School of Computer Science, Dublin, Ireland.
John StoweUniversity College Dublin School of Medicine, Dublin, Ireland.
University College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith a significant increase in utilisation of computed tomography (CT), inappropriate imaging is a significant concern. Manual justification audits of radiology referrals are time-consuming and require financial resources. We aimed to retrospectively audit justification of brain CT referrals by applying natural language processing and traditional machine learning (ML) techniques to predict their justification based on the audit outcomes.

methodsTwo human experts retrospectively analysed justification of 375 adult brain CT referrals performed in a tertiary referral hospital during the 2019 calendar year, using a cloud-based platform for structured referring. Cohen's kappa was computed to measure inter-rater reliability. Referrals were represented as bag-of-words (BOW) and term frequency-inverse document frequency models. Text preprocessing techniques, including custom stop words (CSW) and spell correction (SC), were applied to the referral text. Logistic regression, random forest, and support vector machines (SVM) were used to predict the justification of referrals. A test set (300/75) was used to compute weighted accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC).

resultsIn total, 253 (67.5%) examinations were deemed justified, 75 (20.0%) as unjustified, and 47 (12.5%) as maybe justified. The agreement between the annotators was strong (κ = 0.835). The BOW + CSW + SC + SVM outperformed other binary models with a weighted accuracy of 92%, a sensitivity of 91%, a specificity of 93%, and an AUC of 0.948.

conclusionsTraditional ML models can accurately predict justification of unstructured brain CT referrals. This offers potential for automated justification analysis of CT referrals in clinical departments.

Indexed as

Clinical decision supportJustification auditMachine learningNatural language processingRadiology referral

Identifiers

PMID35925429
PMCPMC9352827
OpenAlexW4289745509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.