ArticleBJR artificial intelligence2026
Explaining transformer-based classification of radiology reports.
Article in BJR artificial intelligence, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Deep learning models developed for the classification of radiological reports have lacked explainability. We aimed to validate and explain a pretrained classification model by applying it to the removal of confounding data from a radiological dataset. Methods: Two radiologists categorized 2038 anonymized MRI head free-text radiology reports for abnormality and for small vessel disease presence. Of these reports, 80% ( Results: The models exhibited excellent classification performance, with a mean receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) of 0.98 for abnormality classification and 0.99 for small vessel disease classification. SHAP highlighted relevant words in both cases. Conclusions: This application validated the use of a pretrained transformer in detecting confounding data in research cohorts, and exhibited explainable results that allow the models' decisions to be understood. By highlighting the specific report terms that drive each prediction, the explainable model output can be reviewed and critiqued by subject matter experts, supporting trust, error analysis, and iterative refinement of AI tools within clinical workflows. Advances in knowledge: This application demonstrates the feasibility of explainable report classification, and the fine-tuned model could be used in future for automatic removal of confounding data from radiology datasets, while providing transparent, case-level justifications that support audit, governance, and clinician acceptance.
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.