生成大型语言模型,用于检测放射学报告中的语音识别错误。

IF 8.1 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Radiology-Artificial Intelligence Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1148/ryai.230205
Reuben A Schmidt, Jarrel C Y Seah, Ke Cao, Lincoln Lim, Wei Lim, Justin Yeung
{"title":"生成大型语言模型,用于检测放射学报告中的语音识别错误。","authors":"Reuben A Schmidt, Jarrel C Y Seah, Ke Cao, Lincoln Lim, Wei Lim, Justin Yeung","doi":"10.1148/ryai.230205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluated the ability of generative large language models (LLMs) to detect speech recognition errors in radiology reports. A dataset of 3233 CT and MRI reports was assessed by radiologists for speech recognition errors. Errors were categorized as clinically significant or not clinically significant. Performances of five generative LLMs-GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4, text-davinci-003, Llama-v2-70B-chat, and Bard-were compared in detecting these errors, using manual error detection as the reference standard. Prompt engineering was used to optimize model performance. GPT-4 demonstrated high accuracy in detecting clinically significant errors (precision, 76.9%; recall, 100%; F1 score, 86.9%) and not clinically significant errors (precision, 93.9%; recall, 94.7%; F1 score, 94.3%). Text-davinci-003 achieved F1 scores of 72% and 46.6% for clinically significant and not clinically significant errors, respectively. GPT-3.5-turbo obtained 59.1% and 32.2% F1 scores, while Llama-v2-70B-chat scored 72.8% and 47.7%. Bard showed the lowest accuracy, with F1 scores of 47.5% and 20.9%. GPT-4 effectively identified challenging errors of nonsense phrases and internally inconsistent statements. Longer reports, resident dictation, and overnight shifts were associated with higher error rates. In conclusion, advanced generative LLMs show potential for automatic detection of speech recognition errors in radiology reports. <b>Keywords:</b> CT, Large Language Model, Machine Learning, MRI, Natural Language Processing, Radiology Reports, Speech, Unsupervised Learning <i>Supplemental material is available for this article</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":29787,"journal":{"name":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10982816/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generative Large Language Models for Detection of Speech Recognition Errors in Radiology Reports.\",\"authors\":\"Reuben A Schmidt, Jarrel C Y Seah, Ke Cao, Lincoln Lim, Wei Lim, Justin Yeung\",\"doi\":\"10.1148/ryai.230205\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study evaluated the ability of generative large language models (LLMs) to detect speech recognition errors in radiology reports. A dataset of 3233 CT and MRI reports was assessed by radiologists for speech recognition errors. Errors were categorized as clinically significant or not clinically significant. Performances of five generative LLMs-GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4, text-davinci-003, Llama-v2-70B-chat, and Bard-were compared in detecting these errors, using manual error detection as the reference standard. Prompt engineering was used to optimize model performance. GPT-4 demonstrated high accuracy in detecting clinically significant errors (precision, 76.9%; recall, 100%; F1 score, 86.9%) and not clinically significant errors (precision, 93.9%; recall, 94.7%; F1 score, 94.3%). Text-davinci-003 achieved F1 scores of 72% and 46.6% for clinically significant and not clinically significant errors, respectively. GPT-3.5-turbo obtained 59.1% and 32.2% F1 scores, while Llama-v2-70B-chat scored 72.8% and 47.7%. Bard showed the lowest accuracy, with F1 scores of 47.5% and 20.9%. GPT-4 effectively identified challenging errors of nonsense phrases and internally inconsistent statements. Longer reports, resident dictation, and overnight shifts were associated with higher error rates. In conclusion, advanced generative LLMs show potential for automatic detection of speech recognition errors in radiology reports. <b>Keywords:</b> CT, Large Language Model, Machine Learning, MRI, Natural Language Processing, Radiology Reports, Speech, Unsupervised Learning <i>Supplemental material is available for this article</i>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29787,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10982816/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.230205\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.230205","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

"刚刚接受 "的论文经过同行评审,已被接受在《放射学》上发表:人工智能》上发表。这篇文章在以最终版本发表之前,还将经过校对、排版和校对审核。请注意,在制作最终校对稿的过程中,可能会发现影响内容的错误。本研究评估了生成式大语言模型(LLM)检测放射学报告中语音识别错误的能力。放射科医生对 3,233 份 CT 和 MRI 报告数据集进行了语音识别错误评估。错误被分为有临床意义和无临床意义。以人工错误检测为参考标准,比较了五种生成式 LLM-GPT-3.5-turbo、GPT-4、text-davinci-003、Llama-v2-70B-chat 和 Bard 在检测这些错误方面的性能。及时工程用于优化模型性能。GPT-4 在检测有临床意义的错误(精确度为 76.9%,召回率为 100%,F1 为 86.9%)和无临床意义的错误(精确度为 93.9%,召回率为 94.7%,F1 为 94.3%)方面表现出很高的准确性。Text-davinci-003对临床重大错误和非临床重大错误的F1得分分别为72%和46.6%。GPT-3.5-turbo的F1得分分别为59.1%和32.2%,而Llama-v2-70B-chat的F1得分分别为72.8%和47.7%。Bard 的准确率最低,F1 分数分别为 47.5% 和 20.9%。GPT-4 能有效识别无意义短语和内部不一致语句等高难度错误。较长的报告、住院医生口述和通宵轮班与较高的错误率有关。总之,先进的生成式 LLM 显示出自动检测放射学报告中语音识别错误的潜力。©RSNA,2024。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Generative Large Language Models for Detection of Speech Recognition Errors in Radiology Reports.

This study evaluated the ability of generative large language models (LLMs) to detect speech recognition errors in radiology reports. A dataset of 3233 CT and MRI reports was assessed by radiologists for speech recognition errors. Errors were categorized as clinically significant or not clinically significant. Performances of five generative LLMs-GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4, text-davinci-003, Llama-v2-70B-chat, and Bard-were compared in detecting these errors, using manual error detection as the reference standard. Prompt engineering was used to optimize model performance. GPT-4 demonstrated high accuracy in detecting clinically significant errors (precision, 76.9%; recall, 100%; F1 score, 86.9%) and not clinically significant errors (precision, 93.9%; recall, 94.7%; F1 score, 94.3%). Text-davinci-003 achieved F1 scores of 72% and 46.6% for clinically significant and not clinically significant errors, respectively. GPT-3.5-turbo obtained 59.1% and 32.2% F1 scores, while Llama-v2-70B-chat scored 72.8% and 47.7%. Bard showed the lowest accuracy, with F1 scores of 47.5% and 20.9%. GPT-4 effectively identified challenging errors of nonsense phrases and internally inconsistent statements. Longer reports, resident dictation, and overnight shifts were associated with higher error rates. In conclusion, advanced generative LLMs show potential for automatic detection of speech recognition errors in radiology reports. Keywords: CT, Large Language Model, Machine Learning, MRI, Natural Language Processing, Radiology Reports, Speech, Unsupervised Learning Supplemental material is available for this article.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.20
自引率
1.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Radiology: Artificial Intelligence is a bi-monthly publication that focuses on the emerging applications of machine learning and artificial intelligence in the field of imaging across various disciplines. This journal is available online and accepts multiple manuscript types, including Original Research, Technical Developments, Data Resources, Review articles, Editorials, Letters to the Editor and Replies, Special Reports, and AI in Brief.
期刊最新文献
Integrated Deep Learning Model for the Detection, Segmentation, and Morphologic Analysis of Intracranial Aneurysms Using CT Angiography. RSNA 2023 Abdominal Trauma AI Challenge Review and Outcomes Analysis. SCIseg: Automatic Segmentation of Intramedullary Lesions in Spinal Cord Injury on T2-weighted MRI Scans. Combining Biology-based and MRI Data-driven Modeling to Predict Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Optimizing Performance of Transformer-based Models for Fetal Brain MR Image Segmentation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1