Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Apr;30(2):228-233.
doi: 10.1007/s10278-016-9927-4.

Assessing Inaccuracies in Automated Information Extraction of Breast Imaging Findings

Affiliations

Assessing Inaccuracies in Automated Information Extraction of Breast Imaging Findings

Ronilda Lacson et al. J Digit Imaging. 2017 Apr.

Abstract

We previously identified breast imaging findings from radiology reports using an expert-based information extraction algorithm as part of the National Cancer Institute's Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) initiative. We validate this algorithm and assess inaccuracies in a different institutional setting. Mammography, ultrasound (US), and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports of patients at an academic health system between 4/2013 and 6/2013 were included for analysis. Accuracy of automatically extracting imaging findings using an algorithm developed at a different institution compared to manual gold standard review is reported. Extraction errors are further categorized based on manual review. Precision and recall for extracting BI-RADS categories remain between 0.9 and 1.0, except for MRI (0.7). F measures for extracting other findings are 0.9 for non-mass enhancement (in MRI) and 0.8-0.9 for cysts (in MRI and US). Extracting breast imaging findings resulted in lowest accuracy for findings of calcification (range 0.4-0.6 in mammography) and asymmetric density (0.5-0.7 in mammography). Majority of errors for extracting imaging findings were due to qualifier-based errors, descriptors which indicate absence of findings, missed by automated extraction (e.g., "benign" calcifications). Our information extraction algorithm provides an effective approach to extracting some breast imaging findings for populating a breast screening registry. However, errors in information extraction when utilizing methods in new settings demonstrate that further work is necessary to extract information content from unstructured multi-institutional radiology reports.

Keywords: Breast neoplasm; Information storage and retrieval; Magnetic resonance imaging; Mammography; Radiology reporting; Ultrasonography.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Quality mammography standards--FDA. Final rule. Fed Reg 62: 55852–55994, 1997 - PubMed
    1. American College of Radiology: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), 4th edition. Am Coll Radiol 2003
    1. Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, Ernster VL, Rosenberg RD, Carney PA, Barlow WE, Geller BM, Kerlikowske K, Edwards BK, Lynch CF, Urban N, Chrvala CA, Key CR, Poplack SP, Worden JK, Kessler LG. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1001–1008. doi: 10.2214/ajr.169.4.9308451. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Potosky AL, Merrill RM, Riley GF, Taplin SH, Barlow W, Fireman BH, Ballard-Barbash R. Breast cancer survival and treatment in health maintenance organization and fee-for-service settings. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997;89:1683–1691. doi: 10.1093/jnci/89.22.1683. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Geller BM, Barlow WE, Ballard-Barbash R, Ernster VL, Yankaskas BC, Sickles EA, Carney PA, Dignan MB, Rosenberg RD, Urban N, Zheng Y, Taplin SH. Use of the American College of Radiology BI-RADS to report on the mammographic evaluation of women with signs and symptoms of breast disease. Radiology. 2002;222:536–542. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2222010620. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources