Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting

Advantages, disadvantages, and impact

Mohan R. Ramaswamy, Gregory Chaljub, Oliver Esch, Donald D. Fanning, Eric VanSonnenberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

66 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. Our objective was to describe our experience with a commercially available continuous speech recognition system, highlighting the advantages, disadvantages, and costs compared with those of conventional transcription for MR imaging reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Data from 5072 reports generated in our MR imaging section during a 9-month period after the implementation of a commercial continuous speech recognition system were compared with 4552 reports produced during the same period 1 year earlier. Information pertaining to the use of continuous speech recognition, report turnaround time, word recognition rate, report appearance, and equipment costs was collected. RESULTS. After its system installation, continuous speech recognition was used to dictate 81.8% of all reports. The mean report turnaround time decreased from 87.8 to 43.6 hr, and report availability at 24 hr increased from 10.5% to 62.5%. The system was found to have an average word recognition accuracy of 92.7% for spontaneous dictation. Mean report length declined from 95 to 60 words, with an increase in spacing errors from 0.3 to 8.0 per 1000 words and a decrease in spelling errors from 3.0 to 0.8 per 1000 words. Initial hardware and software costs were approximately $10,000, compared with a yearly cost of $12,000 for human transcription. CONCLUSION. Although the technology is still evolving and was evaluated in its earliest implementation stages, continuous speech recognition nonetheless markedly improved report turnaround time and proved cost-effective.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)617-622
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume174
Issue number3
StatePublished - 2000

Fingerprint

Costs and Cost Analysis
Software
Technology
Equipment and Supplies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Ramaswamy, M. R., Chaljub, G., Esch, O., Fanning, D. D., & VanSonnenberg, E. (2000). Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting: Advantages, disadvantages, and impact. American Journal of Roentgenology, 174(3), 617-622.

Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting : Advantages, disadvantages, and impact. / Ramaswamy, Mohan R.; Chaljub, Gregory; Esch, Oliver; Fanning, Donald D.; VanSonnenberg, Eric.

In: American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 174, No. 3, 2000, p. 617-622.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ramaswamy, MR, Chaljub, G, Esch, O, Fanning, DD & VanSonnenberg, E 2000, 'Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting: Advantages, disadvantages, and impact', American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 174, no. 3, pp. 617-622.
Ramaswamy MR, Chaljub G, Esch O, Fanning DD, VanSonnenberg E. Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting: Advantages, disadvantages, and impact. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2000;174(3):617-622.
Ramaswamy, Mohan R. ; Chaljub, Gregory ; Esch, Oliver ; Fanning, Donald D. ; VanSonnenberg, Eric. / Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting : Advantages, disadvantages, and impact. In: American Journal of Roentgenology. 2000 ; Vol. 174, No. 3. pp. 617-622.
@article{4476e07f6f81485cb5e12bd8b9eb2d84,
title = "Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting: Advantages, disadvantages, and impact",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE. Our objective was to describe our experience with a commercially available continuous speech recognition system, highlighting the advantages, disadvantages, and costs compared with those of conventional transcription for MR imaging reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Data from 5072 reports generated in our MR imaging section during a 9-month period after the implementation of a commercial continuous speech recognition system were compared with 4552 reports produced during the same period 1 year earlier. Information pertaining to the use of continuous speech recognition, report turnaround time, word recognition rate, report appearance, and equipment costs was collected. RESULTS. After its system installation, continuous speech recognition was used to dictate 81.8{\%} of all reports. The mean report turnaround time decreased from 87.8 to 43.6 hr, and report availability at 24 hr increased from 10.5{\%} to 62.5{\%}. The system was found to have an average word recognition accuracy of 92.7{\%} for spontaneous dictation. Mean report length declined from 95 to 60 words, with an increase in spacing errors from 0.3 to 8.0 per 1000 words and a decrease in spelling errors from 3.0 to 0.8 per 1000 words. Initial hardware and software costs were approximately $10,000, compared with a yearly cost of $12,000 for human transcription. CONCLUSION. Although the technology is still evolving and was evaluated in its earliest implementation stages, continuous speech recognition nonetheless markedly improved report turnaround time and proved cost-effective.",
author = "Ramaswamy, {Mohan R.} and Gregory Chaljub and Oliver Esch and Fanning, {Donald D.} and Eric VanSonnenberg",
year = "2000",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "174",
pages = "617--622",
journal = "American Journal of Roentgenology",
issn = "0361-803X",
publisher = "American Roentgen Ray Society",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Continuous speech recognition in MR imaging reporting

T2 - Advantages, disadvantages, and impact

AU - Ramaswamy, Mohan R.

AU - Chaljub, Gregory

AU - Esch, Oliver

AU - Fanning, Donald D.

AU - VanSonnenberg, Eric

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - OBJECTIVE. Our objective was to describe our experience with a commercially available continuous speech recognition system, highlighting the advantages, disadvantages, and costs compared with those of conventional transcription for MR imaging reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Data from 5072 reports generated in our MR imaging section during a 9-month period after the implementation of a commercial continuous speech recognition system were compared with 4552 reports produced during the same period 1 year earlier. Information pertaining to the use of continuous speech recognition, report turnaround time, word recognition rate, report appearance, and equipment costs was collected. RESULTS. After its system installation, continuous speech recognition was used to dictate 81.8% of all reports. The mean report turnaround time decreased from 87.8 to 43.6 hr, and report availability at 24 hr increased from 10.5% to 62.5%. The system was found to have an average word recognition accuracy of 92.7% for spontaneous dictation. Mean report length declined from 95 to 60 words, with an increase in spacing errors from 0.3 to 8.0 per 1000 words and a decrease in spelling errors from 3.0 to 0.8 per 1000 words. Initial hardware and software costs were approximately $10,000, compared with a yearly cost of $12,000 for human transcription. CONCLUSION. Although the technology is still evolving and was evaluated in its earliest implementation stages, continuous speech recognition nonetheless markedly improved report turnaround time and proved cost-effective.

AB - OBJECTIVE. Our objective was to describe our experience with a commercially available continuous speech recognition system, highlighting the advantages, disadvantages, and costs compared with those of conventional transcription for MR imaging reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Data from 5072 reports generated in our MR imaging section during a 9-month period after the implementation of a commercial continuous speech recognition system were compared with 4552 reports produced during the same period 1 year earlier. Information pertaining to the use of continuous speech recognition, report turnaround time, word recognition rate, report appearance, and equipment costs was collected. RESULTS. After its system installation, continuous speech recognition was used to dictate 81.8% of all reports. The mean report turnaround time decreased from 87.8 to 43.6 hr, and report availability at 24 hr increased from 10.5% to 62.5%. The system was found to have an average word recognition accuracy of 92.7% for spontaneous dictation. Mean report length declined from 95 to 60 words, with an increase in spacing errors from 0.3 to 8.0 per 1000 words and a decrease in spelling errors from 3.0 to 0.8 per 1000 words. Initial hardware and software costs were approximately $10,000, compared with a yearly cost of $12,000 for human transcription. CONCLUSION. Although the technology is still evolving and was evaluated in its earliest implementation stages, continuous speech recognition nonetheless markedly improved report turnaround time and proved cost-effective.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033994404&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033994404&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 174

SP - 617

EP - 622

JO - American Journal of Roentgenology

JF - American Journal of Roentgenology

SN - 0361-803X

IS - 3

ER -