Abstract
Critical results reporting guidelines demand that certain critical findings are communicated to the responsible provider within a specific period of time. In this paper, we discuss a generic report processing pipeline to extract critical findings within the dictated report to allow for automation of quality and compliance oversight using a production dataset containing 1,210,858 radiology exams. Algorithm accuracy on an annotated dataset having 327 sentences was 91.4% (95% CI 87.6-94.2%). Our results show that most critical findings are diagnosed on CT and MR exams and that intracranial hemorrhage and fluid collection are the most prevalent at our institution. 1.6% of the exams were found to have at least one of the ten critical findings we focused on. This methodology can enable detailed analysis of critical results reporting for research, workflow management, compliance, and quality assurance.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
