Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41536583›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2026

Leveraging sequence-to-sequence models for semantic annotation of Dutch pathology reports.

M Siepel, G T N Burger, Q J M Voorham, R Cornet, I Calixto, I Vagliano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

M SiepelAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Digital Health & Methodology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
G T N BurgerAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Quality of Care & Methodology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Q J M VoorhamPalga Foundation, Houten, the Netherlands.
R CornetAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Digital Health & Methodology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
I CalixtoAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Mental Health & Methodology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
I VaglianoAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Digital Health & Methodology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Palga Foundation is responsible for indexing Dutch pathology data across the Netherlands, which relies on annotations of pathology reports. These annotations, derived from the conclusion text, consist of codes from the Palga thesaurus, serving patient care and scientific research. However, manual annotation by pathologists is both labor-intensive and prone to errors. Therefore, in this study, we seek to leverage sequence-to-sequence transformer models, particularly Text-To-Text Transfer Transformer (T5)-based models, to generate these annotations. Additionally, we investigate a constrained decoding (CD) approach that encodes domain knowledge. We compare a standard multilingual T5 model (mT5) with our own T5 model (PaTh5.NL) pre-trained using Palga data with the goal of better aligning the model's learned representations with the specific structure, terminology, and annotation conventions used in Dutch pathology reports. We fine-tune both pre-trained models using default (DD) and CD and compare both decoding strategies. Performance is assessed using Bilingual Evaluation Understudy (BLEU) scores for quantitative evaluation and case-based evaluations for qualitative assessment, where we use the generated codes to retrieve patients from the Palga database. Quantitative evaluations indicated that our two fine-tuned PaTh5.NL models significantly outperformed the fine-tuned mT5 model, particularly for shorter histology and cytology reports, but performance of all models declined on longer or complex reports. The case-based evaluation revealed that, despite higher BLEU scores, the PaTh5.NL models did not consistently outperform the mT5 model in retrieving relevant patients. This study demonstrates that fine-tuned T5-based models can enhance the annotation process for Dutch pathology reports, though challenges remain regarding complex conclusion texts, especially in histology and autopsy reports. Future research should focus on expanding gold-standard datasets and developing post-processing algorithms to improve annotations' generalization.

Indexed as

Autoregressive entity retrievalDeep learningPathologySemantic annotationT5Transformer

Identifiers

PMID41536583
PMCPMC12796927

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.