ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
Extracting structured data from unstructured breast imaging reports with transformer-based models.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large Language Model Translation of BI-RADS Breast Imaging Reports into Arabic: A Blinded Expert Evaluation of Diagnostic Communication Safety.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- SigMine and OPathDb: a literature-mining pipeline and database of potential opportunistic pathogens.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
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 and objective: Structured clinical data is essential for research and informed decision-making, yet medical reports are frequently stored as unstructured free text. This study compared the performance of BERT-based and generative language models in converting unstructured breast imaging reports into structured, tabular data suitable for clinical and research applications. Methods: A dataset of 286 anonymised breast imaging reports in Spanish was translated into English and used to evaluate five transformer-based models pre-trained in medical data: BlueBERT, BioBERT, BioMedBERT, BioGPT and ClinicalT5. Two natural language processing approaches were explored: classification of 19 categorical variables (e.g. diagnostic technique, report type, family history, BI-RADS category, tumour shape and margin) and extractive question answering of four entities (patient age, patient history, parenchymal distortion or asymmetries, and tumour size). Multiple fine-tuning strategies and input configurations were tested for each model, and performance was evaluated using accuracy and macro F1 scores. Results: BioGPT demonstrated the best performance in classification tasks, achieving an overall accuracy of Conclusions: Generative models, particularly BioGPT, offer a robust and scalable approach to automating the extraction of structured information from unstructured breast imaging reports. Their superior performance, combined with their ability to handle multiple tasks concurrently, highlights their potential to reduce the manual effort required for clinical data curation and to enable the efficient integration of imaging data into research and clinical workflows.
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.