2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2022.08.450
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning Approach to Identification of Incidental Radiology Findings in Trauma Patients Discharged from the Emergency Department

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the context of neuroimaging, LLMs can identify noteworthy information in radiology reports in emergency department settings. 30 In cases of stroke, for instance, where timely intervention is critical and patient communication may be impaired due to aphasia or other neurologic deficits, an LLM could serve as an effective tool to flag essential neuroimaging findings for providers.…”
Section: Electronic Health Record Text Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the context of neuroimaging, LLMs can identify noteworthy information in radiology reports in emergency department settings. 30 In cases of stroke, for instance, where timely intervention is critical and patient communication may be impaired due to aphasia or other neurologic deficits, an LLM could serve as an effective tool to flag essential neuroimaging findings for providers.…”
Section: Electronic Health Record Text Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It consisted of four studies involving 23,707 patients focused on syndromic surveillance, 27,29,33,41 12 studies covering 155,402 patients targeting diseases/events/syndromes recognition, [36][37][38][39][40][42][43][44][45]47,48,53 and 11 studies involving 9025 images concentrating on radiology interpretations. 28,[30][31][32]34,35,46,[49][50][51][52] Detailed descriptions of each study are provided in Table 2. The mean sensitivity across studies was 0.87 CI 0.82-0.91), specificity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.92-0.97), PPV was 0.18 (95% CI 0.18-0.18), NPV was 1.00 (95% CI 1.00-1.00), LR+ was 17.4 (95% CI 10.3-29.5), and LR− was 0.13 (95% CI 0.09-0.19).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, this meta‐analysis included 27 studies with 179,109 patients and 9025 images. It consisted of four studies involving 23,707 patients focused on syndromic surveillance, 27,29,33,41 12 studies covering 155,402 patients targeting diseases/events/syndromes recognition, 36–40,42–45,47,48,53 and 11 studies involving 9025 images concentrating on radiology interpretations 28,30–32,34,35,46,49–52 . Detailed descriptions of each study are provided in Table 2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A Natural Language Processing (NLP) approach was used to train an algorithm to identify text patterns in the CT report relating to the binary-coded outcome (incidental finding present/not present) 5. The best cut-off was defined as the receiver operating characteristic curve point which maximised both sensitivity and specificity.…”
Section: A Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning Approach ...mentioning
confidence: 99%