Large language models for structured reporting in radiology: past, present, and future - Scorecard - MDSpire

Large language models for structured reporting in radiology: past, present, and future

  • By

  • Felix Busch

  • Lena Hoffmann

  • Daniel Pinto dos Santos

  • Marcus R. Makowski

  • Luca Saba

  • Philipp Prucker

  • Martin Hadamitzky

  • Nassir Navab

  • Jakob Nikolas Kather

  • Daniel Truhn

  • Renato Cuocolo

  • Lisa C. Adams

  • Keno K. Bressem

  • October 23, 2024

  • 0 min

Share

Clinical Scorecard: Evolution of Large Language Models in Radiology Structured Reporting: Historical Insights and Future Directions

At a Glance

CategoryDetail
ConditionRadiology Structured Reporting (SR)
Key MechanismsStandardization of radiologic report content and use of IT tools including large language models (LLMs) to import, organize, and generate structured reports
Target PopulationRadiologists and healthcare professionals involved in radiology reporting
Care SettingRadiology departments and clinical radiology practice

Key Highlights

  • Structured reporting improves report quality, reduces errors, and enhances guideline compliance but may limit nuanced interpretations and requires significant resources.
  • Historical milestones include ACR communication guidelines (1991), RadLex lexicon (2006), and RSNA RadReport templates linking standardized vocabularies.
  • Large language models (LLMs), based on transformer architectures, represent a promising solution to integrate SR into radiologists’ workflows by automating and enhancing report generation.

Guideline-Based Recommendations

Diagnosis

  • Adopt standardized nomenclature and structured templates to improve clarity and consistency of radiology reports.

Management

  • Implement IT-based SR methods linking radiology vocabularies (RadLex, SNOMED CT, LOINC) to report elements.
  • Leverage LLMs to reduce manual effort and improve workflow integration in structured reporting.

Monitoring & Follow-up

  • Evaluate SR adoption rates and compliance with national and international guidelines.
  • Monitor radiologist engagement and feedback to optimize SR templates and LLM integration.

Risks

  • Potential rigidity of structured reports limiting nuanced clinical interpretation.
  • Resource-intensive creation and maintenance of SR templates.
  • Reluctance among radiologists to adopt SR due to workflow disruption.

Patient & Prescribing Data

Patients undergoing radiologic imaging requiring diagnostic interpretation and reporting

Structured reporting supported by LLMs can enhance report accuracy and accessibility, potentially improving diagnostic communication and patient management.

Clinical Best Practices

  • Use standardized vocabularies and ontologies (RadLex, SNOMED CT, LOINC) to ensure uniformity in reporting.
  • Incorporate LLMs to automate and streamline the generation of structured radiology reports.
  • Engage radiologists in the development and continuous updating of SR templates to ensure usability and clinical relevance.
  • Encourage institutional and policy-level incentives to promote SR adoption in routine clinical practice.

References

Original Source(s)

Related Content