Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20819854›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Extracting medication information from clinical text.

Ozlem Uzuner, Imre Solti, Eithon Cadag

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 215 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
215citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

215 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Information extraction from clinical notes: are we ready to switch to large language models?Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Efficient extraction of medication information from clinical notes: an evaluation in 2 languages.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. CACER: Clinical concept Annotations for Cancer Events and Relations.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

155 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ozlem UzunerDepartment of Information Studies, University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY, USA. ouzuner@albany.edu
Imre Solti
Eithon Cadag

Funding

Informatics for Integrating Biology/ the Bedside (RMI)U54LM008748 · NLM · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI KOHANE, ISAAC S. · 2004 to 2013
$39.0M
University of Washington Biomedical Informatics and Data Science Research Training ProgramT15LM007442 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI JOHN H. GENNARI, Andrea L. Hartzler · 2002 to 2026
$19.6M
Increasing Clinical Trial Enrollment: A Semi-Automated Patient Centered ApproachR00LM010227 · NLM · CINCINNATI CHILDRENS HOSP MED CTR · PI SOLTI, IMRE · 2010 to 2012
$727k
Increasing Clinical Trial Enrollment: A Semi-Automated Patient Centered ApproachK99LM010227 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI SOLTI, IMRE · 2009 to 2009
$84k
NIAID NIH HHS HHSN272200700057CNLM NIH HHS 1K99LM010227-0110NLM NIH HHS 2 T15 LM007442-06NLM NIH HHS 5 U54 LM008748NLM NIH HHS K99 LM010227NLM NIH HHS R00 LM010227NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007442NLM NIH HHS T15 LM07442NLM NIH HHS U54 LM008748NLM NIH HHS U54LM008748PHS HHS HHSN272200700057 CPHS HHS N00244-09-1-0081
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Third i2b2 Workshop on Natural Language Processing Challenges for Clinical Records focused on the identification of medications, their dosages, modes (routes) of administration, frequencies, durations, and reasons for administration in discharge summaries. This challenge is referred to as the medication challenge. For the medication challenge, i2b2 released detailed annotation guidelines along with a set of annotated discharge summaries. Twenty teams representing 23 organizations and nine countries participated in the medication challenge. The teams produced rule-based, machine learning, and hybrid systems targeted to the task. Although rule-based systems dominated the top 10, the best performing system was a hybrid. Of all medication-related fields, durations and reasons were the most difficult for all systems to detect. While medications themselves were identified with better than 0.75 F-measure by all of the top 10 systems, the best F-measure for durations and reasons were 0.525 and 0.459, respectively. State-of-the-art natural language processing systems go a long way toward extracting medication names, dosages, modes, and frequencies. However, they are limited in recognizing duration and reason fields and would benefit from future research.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsNatural Language ProcessingPharmaceutical PreparationsComputers, HybridHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalPatient DropoutsPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID20819854
PMCPMC2995677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.