ArticleSovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine2024
Comparison of an Ensemble of Machine Learning Models and the BERT Language Model for Analysis of Text Descriptions of Brain CT Reports to Determine the Presence of Intracranial Hemorrhage.
Article in Sovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Performance of Natural Language Processing Model in Extracting Information from Free-Text Radiology Reports: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Pooled it
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
Materials and Methods: Seven machine learning algorithms and three text vectorization techniques were selected as models to solve the binary classification problem. These models were trained on textual data represented by 3980 brain CT reports from 56 inpatient medical facilities in Moscow. The study utilized three text vectorization techniques: bag of words, TF-IDF, and word2vec. The resulting data were then processed by the following machine learning algorithms: decision tree, random forest, logistic regression, nearest neighbors, support vector machines, Catboost, and XGboost. Data analysis and pre-processing were performed using NLTK (Natural Language Toolkit, version 3.6.5), libraries for character-based and statistical processing of natural language, and Scikit-learn (version 0.24.2), a library for machine learning containing tools to tackle classification challenges. MedRuBertTiny2 was taken as a BERT transformer model pre-trained on medical data. Results: Based on the training and testing outcomes from seven machine learning algorithms, the authors selected three algorithms that yielded the highest metrics (i.e. sensitivity and specificity): CatBoost, logistic regression, and nearest neighbors. The highest metrics were achieved by the bag of words technique. These algorithms were assembled into an ensemble using the stacking technique. The sensitivity and specificity for the validation dataset separated from the original sample were 0.93 and 0.90, respectively. Next, the ensemble and the BERT model were trained on an independent dataset containing 9393 textual radiology reports also divided into training and test sets. Once the ensemble was tested on this dataset, the resulting sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 and 0.90, respectively. The BERT model tested on these data demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.97 and a specificity of 0.90. Conclusion: When analyzing textual reports of brain CT scans with signs of intracranial hemorrhage, the trained ensemble demonstrated high accuracy metrics. Still, manual quality control of the results is required during its application. The pre-trained BERT transformer model, additionally trained on diagnostic textual reports, demonstrated higher accuracy metrics (p<0.05). The results show promise in terms of finding specific values for both binary classification task and in-depth analysis of unstructured medical information.
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.