Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39182008›Full record

ArticleNPJ digital medicine2024

A scoping review of large language model based approaches for information extraction from radiology reports.

Daniel Reichenpfader, Henning Müller, Kerstin Denecke

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Multidisciplinary attitudes towards LLM-structured oncologic CT reports: a prospective fixed-sequence questionnaire study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Article
  3. The consensus-based CINEX guideline for reporting clinical information extraction studies.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Daniel ReichenpfaderInstitute for Patient-Centered Digital Health, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Biel/Bienne, Switzerland. daniel.reichenpfader@bfh.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8052-3359
Henning MüllerDepartment of Radiology and Medical Informatics, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6800-9878
Kerstin DeneckeInstitute for Patient-Centered Digital Health, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Biel/Bienne, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6691-396X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiological imaging is a globally prevalent diagnostic method, yet the free text contained in radiology reports is not frequently used for secondary purposes. Natural Language Processing can provide structured data retrieved from these reports. This paper provides a summary of the current state of research on Large Language Model (LLM) based approaches for information extraction (IE) from radiology reports. We conduct a scoping review that follows the PRISMA-ScR guideline. Queries of five databases were conducted on August 1st 2023. Among the 34 studies that met inclusion criteria, only pre-transformer and encoder-based models are described. External validation shows a general performance decrease, although LLMs might improve generalizability of IE approaches. Reports related to CT and MRI examinations, as well as thoracic reports, prevail. Most common challenges reported are missing validation on external data and augmentation of the described methods. Different reporting granularities affect the comparability and transparency of approaches.

Identifiers

PMID39182008
PMCPMC11344824

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.