ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Natural language processing-based analysis of the level of adoption by expert radiologists of the ASSR, ASNR and NASS version 2.0 of lumbar disc nomenclature: an eight-year survey.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: The American Society of Spine Radiology (ASSR), American Society of Neuroradiology (ASNR), and North American Spine Society (NASS) published a consensus paper with recommendations for lumbar disc nomenclature reports in 2014. We aimed to evaluate the degree of adoption in our radiology department of the ASSR, ASNR, and NASS 2.0 lumbar spine consensus paper using natural language processing (NLP). Methods: In March 2015 we gave in our radiology department, at HT Medica in Jaén (Spain) a lecture detailing the changes proposed in the ASSR, ASNR, and NASS consensus about lumbar disc nomenclature, version 2.0. We analyzed 34,064 lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports from three different expert radiologists (A, B, and C) performed from May 2010 to February 2015 (15,813 studies) and from March 2015 to February 2022 (18,251 studies). Using an NLP algorithm, we evaluated 29 old and new terms related to 4 different categories: disc with fissures of the annulus, degenerated disc, herniated disc, and location of the disc. Results: A relevant decrease in the percentage of use of old terms was found for degenerated disc category (44.63% for radiologist B and 18.95% for radiologist C) and disc localization (18.86% for radiologist A and 27.73% for radiologist C). Relevant increments in the percentage of use of new lexicon were depicted for terms related to degenerated disc (32.48% for radiologist C), herniated disc (7.27% for radiologist A) and disc localization (36.53% for radiologist C). Conclusions: NLP algorithms may help to manage large radiological report datasets to evaluate the impact and degree of adherence of radiologists to recommendations for the use of ASSR, ASNR and NASS lumbar disc nomenclature version 2.0.
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.