Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41245151›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2025

A comparative performance analysis of regular expressions and a large language model-based approach to extract the BI-RADS score from radiological reports.

Fabio Dennstädt, Luc Lerch, Max Schmerder, Nikola Cihoric, Grazia Maria Cereghetti, Roberto Gaio, Harald Bonel, Irina Filchenko, Janna Hastings, Florian Dammann and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

13 authors.

Fabio DennstädtDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5374-8720
Luc LerchDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Max SchmerderDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Nikola CihoricDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Grazia Maria CereghettiDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Roberto GaioDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Harald BonelDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Irina FilchenkoDepartment of Neurology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Janna HastingsSchool of Medicine, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen 9000, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3469-4923
Florian DammannDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Daniel M AebersoldDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Hendrik von Tengg-KobligkDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.
Knud NairzDepartment of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology (DIPR), Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern 3010, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3337-110X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Different natural language processing (NLP) techniques have demonstrated promising results for data extraction from radiological reports. Both traditional rule-based methods like regular expressions (Regex) and modern large language models (LLMs) can extract structured information. However, comparison between these approaches for extraction of specific radiological data elements has not been widely conducted. Methods: We compared accuracy and processing time between Regex and LLM-based approaches for extracting Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) scores from 7764 radiology reports (mammography, ultrasound, MRI [magnetic resonance imaging], and biopsy). We developed a rule-based algorithm using Regex patterns and implemented an LLM-based extraction using the Rombos-LLM-V2.6-Qwen-14b model. A ground truth dataset of 199 manually classified reports was used for evaluation. Results: We did not detect a statistically significant difference in the accuracy in extracting BI-RADS scores between Regex and an LLM-based method (accuracy of 89.20% for Regex vs 87.69% for the LLM-based method; Conclusion: For structured, standardized data like BI-RADS, traditional NLP techniques seem to be superior, though future work should explore hybrid approaches combining Regex precision for standardized elements with LLM contextual understanding for more complex information extraction tasks.

Indexed as

BI-RADSdata extractionlarge language modelsnatural language processingradiologyregular expressions

Identifiers

PMID41245151
PMCPMC12612664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.