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
. 2018 Apr;31(2):245-251.
doi: 10.1007/s10278-017-0021-3.

Automatic Determination of the Need for Intravenous Contrast in Musculoskeletal MRI Examinations Using IBM Watson's Natural Language Processing Algorithm

Affiliations

Automatic Determination of the Need for Intravenous Contrast in Musculoskeletal MRI Examinations Using IBM Watson's Natural Language Processing Algorithm

Hari Trivedi et al. J Digit Imaging. 2018 Apr.

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocoling can be time- and resource-intensive, and protocols can often be suboptimal dependent upon the expertise or preferences of the protocoling radiologist. Providing a best-practice recommendation for an MRI protocol has the potential to improve efficiency and decrease the likelihood of a suboptimal or erroneous study. The goal of this study was to develop and validate a machine learning-based natural language classifier that can automatically assign the use of intravenous contrast for musculoskeletal MRI protocols based upon the free-text clinical indication of the study, thereby improving efficiency of the protocoling radiologist and potentially decreasing errors. We utilized a deep learning-based natural language classification system from IBM Watson, a question-answering supercomputer that gained fame after challenging the best human players on Jeopardy! in 2011. We compared this solution to a series of traditional machine learning-based natural language processing techniques that utilize a term-document frequency matrix. Each classifier was trained with 1240 MRI protocols plus their respective clinical indications and validated with a test set of 280. Ground truth of contrast assignment was obtained from the clinical record. For evaluation of inter-reader agreement, a blinded second reader radiologist analyzed all cases and determined contrast assignment based on only the free-text clinical indication. In the test set, Watson demonstrated overall accuracy of 83.2% when compared to the original protocol. This was similar to the overall accuracy of 80.2% achieved by an ensemble of eight traditional machine learning algorithms based on a term-document matrix. When compared to the second reader's contrast assignment, Watson achieved 88.6% agreement. When evaluating only the subset of cases where the original protocol and second reader were concordant (n = 251), agreement climbed further to 90.0%. The classifier was relatively robust to spelling and grammatical errors, which were frequent. Implementation of this automated MR contrast determination system as a clinical decision support tool may save considerable time and effort of the radiologist while potentially decreasing error rates, and require no change in order entry or workflow.

Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Deep learning; IBM Watson; Imaging protocol; Machine learning; Natural language processing (NLP); Quality improvement; Workflow efficiency.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart demonstrating data processing of 1544 free-text MRI protocols with their respective clinical indications. Initial labels used in the training and test set were assigned using regular expression searches and manually verified by the authors. MRI protocols with ambiguous contrast assignment were excluded from the dataset
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Word cloud demonstrating the most commonly found words in the free-text clinical indication. Numbers and punctuation were removed, and each word was converted to its radical form for traditional natural language processing methods

References

    1. Boland GW, Duszak R, Jr, Kalra M. Protocol design and optimization. Journal of the American College of Radiology. 2014;11(5):440–441. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.01.021. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ginat DT, Uppuluri P, Christoforidis G, Katzman G, Lee S-K. Identification of neuroradiology MRI protocol errors via a quality-driven categorization approach. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(5):545–548. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.08.027. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bairstow PJ, Persaud J, Mendelson R, Nguyen L. Reducing inappropriate diagnostic practice through education and decision support. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2010;22(3):194–200. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzq016. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Garg AX, Adhikari NKJ, McDonald H, et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes. JAMA. 2005;293(10):1223. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1223. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blackmore CC, Castro A: Improving the quality of imaging in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 22(12):1385–1392, 2015 10.1111/acem.12816 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms