Efficiency Improvement in a Busy Radiology Practice: Determination of Musculoskeletal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Protocol Using Deep-Learning Convolutional Neural Networks
Open accessAbstract
The purposes of this study are to evaluate the feasibility of protocol determination with a convolutional neural networks (CNN) classifier based on short-text classification and to evaluate the agreements by comparing protocols determined by CNN with those determined by musculoskeletal radiologists. Following institutional review board approval, the database of a hospital information system (HIS) was queried for lists of MRI examinations, referring department, patient age, and patient gender. These were exported to a local workstation for analyses: 5258 and 1018 consecutive musculoskeletal MRI examinations were used for the training and test datasets, respectively. The subjects for pre-processing were routine or tumor protocols and the contents were word combinations of the referring department, region, contrast media (or not), gender, and age. The CNN Embedded vector classifier was used with Word2Vec Google news vectors. The test set was tested with each classification model and results were output as routine or tumor protocols. The CNN determinations were evaluated using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The accuracies were evaluated by a radiologist-confirmed protocol as the reference protocols. The optimal cut-off values for protocol determination between routine protocols and tumor protocols was 0.5067 with a sensitivity of 92.10%, a specificity of 95.76%, and an area under curve (AUC) of 0.977. The overall accuracy was 94.2% for the ConvNet model. All MRI protocols were correct in the pelvic bone, upper arm, wrist, and lower leg MRIs. Deep-learning-based convolutional neural networks were clinically utilized to determine musculoskeletal MRI protocols. CNN-based text learning and applications could be extended to other radiologic tasks besides image interpretations, improving the work performance of the radiologist.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Convolutional neural networks can be used for efficiency improvement in radiology practices through protocol determination based on short-text classification.
“Convolutional neural networks can be used for efficiency improvement in radiology practices through protocol determination based on short-text classification [87].”
From An overview of deep learning in medical imaging focusing on MRI (2019) · cites this paper as [87]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Ogutu, J. O., Schulz-Streeck, T., & Piepho, H.-P. (2012) · BMC Proceedings · doi:10.1186/1753-6561-6-s2-s10 · Cited by 440 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An overview of deep learning in medical imaging focusing on MRI
Lundervold, A. S., & Lundervold, A. (2019) · Zeitschrift für Medizinische Physik · doi:10.1016/j.zemedi.2018.11.002 · Cited by 2,058 · see citing works
Pierre, K., Haneberg, A. G., Kwak, S., Peters, K. R., Hochhegger, B., Sananmuang, T., Tunlayadechanont, P., Tighe, P. J., Mancuso, A., & Forghani, R. (2023) · Seminars in Roentgenology · doi:10.1053/j.ro.2023.02.003 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lee, Y. H.
- Affiliations
- Yonsei University (KR)
- Corresponding author
- Lee, Young Han
- ORCID
- Lee, Young Han
- Venue
- Journal of Digital Imaging
- Published
- 2018-04-04
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 604-610
- ISSN
- 0897-1889 (ISSN-L)
- 1618-727X
- PMC
- PMC6148815
- OpenAlex
- W2795630411
- Cited by
- 97
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 2.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- YUHSpace (Yonsei University Medical Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- National Research Foundation
- Fonds National de la Recherche Luxembourg
- Ministry of Science and ICT, South Korea
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
- Keywords
- musculoskeletal MRI, convolutional neural networks, text classification, Word2Vec, radiology workflow efficiency, radiologist workload, hospital information system data, radiology reporting
- MeSH terms
- Deep Learning, Algorithms, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Musculoskeletal Diseases, Musculoskeletal System, Sensitivity and Specificity, Databases, Factual, Neural Networks, Computer, Efficiency, Organizational, Workflow
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review