Agathe Zecevic, Laurence Jackson, Xinyue Zhang, Polychronis Pavlidis, Jason Dunn, Nigel Trudgill, Shahd Ahmed, Pierfrancesco Visaggi, Zanil YoonusNizar, Angus Roberts, Sebastian S. Zeki
{"title":"Automated decision making in Barrett’s oesophagus: development and deployment of a natural language processing tool","authors":"Agathe Zecevic, Laurence Jackson, Xinyue Zhang, Polychronis Pavlidis, Jason Dunn, Nigel Trudgill, Shahd Ahmed, Pierfrancesco Visaggi, Zanil YoonusNizar, Angus Roberts, Sebastian S. Zeki","doi":"10.1038/s41746-024-01302-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Manual decisions regarding the timing of surveillance endoscopy for premalignant Barrett’s oesophagus (BO) is error-prone. This leads to inefficient resource usage and safety risks. To automate decision-making, we fine-tuned Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) models to categorize BO length (EndoBERT) and worst histopathological grade (PathBERT) on 4,831 endoscopy and 4,581 pathology reports from Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital (GSTT). The accuracies for EndoBERT test sets from GSTT, King’s College Hospital (KCH), and Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals (SWB) were 0.95, 0.86, and 0.99, respectively. Average accuracies for PathBERT were 0.93, 0.91, and 0.92, respectively. A retrospective analysis of 1640 GSTT reports revealed a 27% discrepancy between endoscopists’ decisions and model recommendations. This study underscores the development and deployment of NLP-based software in BO surveillance, demonstrating high performance at multiple sites. The analysis emphasizes the potential efficiency of automation in enhancing precision and guideline adherence in clinical decision-making.","PeriodicalId":19349,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Digital Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":12.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-024-01302-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Digital Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-024-01302-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Manual decisions regarding the timing of surveillance endoscopy for premalignant Barrett’s oesophagus (BO) is error-prone. This leads to inefficient resource usage and safety risks. To automate decision-making, we fine-tuned Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) models to categorize BO length (EndoBERT) and worst histopathological grade (PathBERT) on 4,831 endoscopy and 4,581 pathology reports from Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital (GSTT). The accuracies for EndoBERT test sets from GSTT, King’s College Hospital (KCH), and Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals (SWB) were 0.95, 0.86, and 0.99, respectively. Average accuracies for PathBERT were 0.93, 0.91, and 0.92, respectively. A retrospective analysis of 1640 GSTT reports revealed a 27% discrepancy between endoscopists’ decisions and model recommendations. This study underscores the development and deployment of NLP-based software in BO surveillance, demonstrating high performance at multiple sites. The analysis emphasizes the potential efficiency of automation in enhancing precision and guideline adherence in clinical decision-making.
期刊介绍:
npj Digital Medicine is an online open-access journal that focuses on publishing peer-reviewed research in the field of digital medicine. The journal covers various aspects of digital medicine, including the application and implementation of digital and mobile technologies in clinical settings, virtual healthcare, and the use of artificial intelligence and informatics.
The primary goal of the journal is to support innovation and the advancement of healthcare through the integration of new digital and mobile technologies. When determining if a manuscript is suitable for publication, the journal considers four important criteria: novelty, clinical relevance, scientific rigor, and digital innovation.