Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20819864›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Textractor: a hybrid system for medications and reason for their prescription extraction from clinical text documents.

Stéphane M Meystre, Julien Thibault, Shuying Shen, John F Hurdle, Brett R South

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 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. AI-Based Automation for Medication Reconciliation: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Clinical concept extraction: A methodology review.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2020
    Review
  6. sig2db: a Workflow for Processing Natural Language from Prescription Instructions for Clinical Data Warehouses.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Clinical research informatics: a conceptual perspective.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2012
    Article
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

5 authors.

Stéphane M MeystreDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. stephane.meystre@hsc.utah.edu
Julien Thibault
Shuying Shen
John F Hurdle
Brett R South

Funding

Informatics for Integrating Biology/ the Bedside (RMI)U54LM008748 · NLM · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI KOHANE, ISAAC S. · 2004 to 2013
$39.0M
POET: Consolidated, Comprehensive Clinical Text PreprocessingR21LM009967 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI HURDLE, JOHN F. · 2008 to 2009
$421k
NLM NIH HHS R21 LM009967NLM NIH HHS U54 LM008748NLM NIH HHS U54LM008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledOBJECTIVE To describe a new medication information extraction system-Textractor-developed for the 'i2b2 medication extraction challenge'. The development, functionalities, and official evaluation of the system are detailed.

designTextractor is based on the Apache Unstructured Information Management Architecture (UMIA) framework, and uses methods that are a hybrid between machine learning and pattern matching. Two modules in the system are based on machine learning algorithms, while other modules use regular expressions, rules, and dictionaries, and one module embeds MetaMap Transfer. MEASUREMENTS: The official evaluation was based on a reference standard of 251 discharge summaries annotated by all teams participating in the challenge. The metrics used were recall, precision, and the F(1)-measure. They were calculated with exact and inexact matches, and were averaged at the level of systems and documents.

resultsThe reference metric for this challenge, the system-level overall F(1)-measure, reached about 77% for exact matches, with a recall of 72% and a precision of 83%. Performance was the best with route information (F(1)-measure about 86%), and was good for dosage and frequency information, with F(1)-measures of about 82-85%. Results were not as good for durations, with F(1)-measures of 36-39%, and for reasons, with F(1)-measures of 24-27%.

conclusionThe official evaluation of Textractor for the i2b2 medication extraction challenge demonstrated satisfactory performance. This system was among the 10 best performing systems in this challenge.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsNatural Language ProcessingPharmaceutical PreparationsArtificial IntelligenceHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalPattern Recognition, AutomatedPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID20819864
PMCPMC2995680

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.