A system includes a modeler (214) that generates a model which models a quality of findings in radiologist reports as function of deposited dose of scans from which the radiologist reports are created and a dose optimizer (216) that determines an optimal dose value for a planned scan based on the model and one or more optimization rules (218). A method includes generating a model which models a quality of fmdings in radiologist reports as a function of deposited dose of scans from which the radiologist reports are created and determining an optimal dose value for a planned scan based on the model and one or more optimization rules.
Please help me write a proper abstract based on the patent claims. CLAIM: 1. A system, comprising: a modeler that generates a model which models a quality of findings in radiologist reports as a mathematical function of deposited dose of scans from which the radiologist reports are created; and a dose optimizer that determines an optimal dose value for a planned scan based on the model and one or more optimization rules. 2. (canceled) 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the modeler models the quality of findings graphically in a regression curve. 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more optimization rules defines the optimal dose value as a predetermined percentage between a maximum quality and a minimum quality. 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the quality of findings corresponds to a positive finding rate. 6. The system of claim 1, further comprising: an evaluator that individually evaluates groups of related imaging studies, wherein the modeler generates a model for a group of the groups based on a result of an evaluation of that group. 7. The system of claim 6, wherein the evaluation is based on a sub-set of sections of the radiologist report. 8. The system of claim 6, wherein the evaluation of the group is normalized across interpreting radiologist. 9. The system of claim 6, wherein the evaluation is specific to a style of a particular interpreting radiologist. 10. The system of claim 6, wherein the evaluation determines at least one of a presence, an absence, or a frequency of one or more of: a count of terms of uncertainty; a statistical measures of uncertainty based on sentiment analysis; a presence of positive findings; a presence of negative findings; a presence of comparison findings with prior report; a presence of recommended actions; a strength of the recommendation; an average number of distinct medical concepts, or other metric. 11. The system of claim 6, further comprising: a data grouper that groups imaging related data extracted from a data repository into one or more groups, wherein the evaluator individually evaluates one or more of the groups. 12. The system of claim 11, wherein the data grouper groups the imaging related data based on one or more of imaging protocol, anatomy scanned, clinical indication, demographics, or interpreting radiologist. 13. The system of claim 1, further comprising: a validator that validates scan settings, of the planned scan, related to dose based on the optimal dose value. 14. The system of claim 13, wherein the validator compares an estimated dose value of the planed scanned and the optimal dose value and conveys a warning signal to the console 120 in response to the estimated dose value exceeding the optimal dose value. 15. The system of claim 13, wherein at least one of the estimated dose value, the optimal dose value or an accumulated dose value of the patient is visually presented via a monitor. 16. A method, comprising: generating a model which models a quality of findings in radiologist reports as a function of deposited dose of scans from which the radiologist reports are created; and determining an optimal dose value for a planned scan based on the model, a group assignment for the planned scan, and one or more optimization rules. 17. The method of claim 16, wherein the optimal dose value corresponds to a dose value at which a likelihood of improving a positive finding rate by increasing the dose delivered is less than a predetermined threshold. 18. The method of claim 16, further comprising: extracting imaging related data from a data repository into one or more groups, wherein the imaging related data includes image data and one or more of an imaging protocol, dose related imaging parameters, dose measurements, clinical indications, an identification of the interpreting radiologist, a radiologist report, patient demographics, an identification of the scanned anatomy corresponding to the image data; grouping the extracted imaging related data into a plurality of groups, wherein the extracted imaging related data is grouped based on one or more of imaging protocol, anatomy scanned, clinical indication, demographics, or interpreting radiologist; and evaluating, individually, one or more of the groups of related imaging studies, wherein the evaluation determines at least one of a presence, an absence, or a frequency of one or more of: a count of terms of uncertainty; a statistical measures of uncertainty based on sentiment analysis; a presence of positive findings; a presence of negative findings; a presence of comparison findings with prior report; a presence of recommended actions; a strength of the recommendation; an average number of distinct medical concepts, or other metric. 19. The method of claim 18, further comprising: assigning the planned scan to a predetermined group of scans; identifying and obtaining the optimal dose value for the predetermined group of scans; comparing an estimated dose value of the planned scan and the obtained optimal dose value; and generating a warning signal in response to the estimated dose value exceeding the optimal dose value. 20. A system, comprising: an imaging system configured to scan a patient based on predetermined scan parameters of a planned scan of a patient, wherein the predetermined scan parameters include at least one scan parameter that affects a dose delivered to the patient when the patient is scanned; a report and dose evaluator that determines an optimal dose value for a scan of the patient based on a relationship between a quality of findings in radiologist reports and measured deposited dose of previously performed scans of patients; and a validator that compares an estimated dose value of the planned scan and the optimal dose value and generates a signal indicating whether the estimated dose value exceeds the optimal dose value, and, in response to the estimated dose value not exceeding the optimal dose value, the imaging system performs the scan based on the predetermined scan parameters.