ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2010
Automated identification of medical concepts and assertions in medical text.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extracting diagnoses and investigation results from unstructured text in electronic health records by semi-supervised machine learning.PloS one · 2012Article
- Leveraging rich annotations to improve learning of medical concepts from clinical free text.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper describes a machine learning, text processing approach that allows the extraction of key medical information from unstructured text in Electronic Medical Records. The approach utilizes a novel text representation that shares the simplicity of the widely used bag-of-words representation, but can also represent some form of semantic information in the text. The large dimensionality of this type of learning models is controlled by the use of a ℓ(1) regularization to favor parsimonious models. Experimental results demonstrate the accuracy of the approach in extracting medical assertions that can be associated to polarity and relevance detection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21347065PMC3041384What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.