Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21597105›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Hybrid methods for improving information access in clinical documents: concept, assertion, and relation identification.

Anne-Lyse Minard, Anne-Laure Ligozat, Asma Ben Abacha, Delphine Bernhard, Bruno Cartoni, Louise Deléger, Brigitte Grau, Sophie Rosset, Pierre Zweigenbaum, Cyril Grouin

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

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Chinese Clinical Named Entity Recognition with ALBERT and MHA Mechanism.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022
    Article
  4. Clinical Concept Extraction with Lexical Semantics to Support Automatic Annotation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  5. Differentiating Sense through Semantic Interaction Data.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2016
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. "Big data" and the electronic health record.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2014
    Review
  9. Learning to identify treatment relations in clinical text.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2014
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Electronic health records-driven phenotyping: challenges, recent advances, and perspectives.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2013
    Article
  12. Automated outcome classification of emergency department computed tomography imaging reports.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2013
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Clinical research informatics: a conceptual perspective.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2012
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Eventual situations for timeline extraction from clinical reports.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
    Article
  19. 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

10 authors.

Anne-Lyse MinardLIMSI-CNRS, Orsay Cedex, France.
Anne-Laure Ligozat
Asma Ben Abacha
Delphine Bernhard
Bruno Cartoni
Louise Deléger
Brigitte Grau
Sophie Rosset
Pierre Zweigenbaum
Cyril Grouin

Funding

Informatics for Integrating Biology/ the Bedside (RMI)U54LM008748 · NLM · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI KOHANE, ISAAC S. · 2004 to 2013
$39.0M
NLM NIH HHS U54 LM008748NLM NIH HHS U54-LM008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis paper describes the approaches the authors developed while participating in the i2b2/VA 2010 challenge to automatically extract medical concepts and annotate assertions on concepts and relations between concepts.

designThe authors'approaches rely on both rule-based and machine-learning methods. Natural language processing is used to extract features from the input texts; these features are then used in the authors' machine-learning approaches. The authors used Conditional Random Fields for concept extraction, and Support Vector Machines for assertion and relation annotation. Depending on the task, the authors tested various combinations of rule-based and machine-learning methods.

resultsThe authors'assertion annotation system obtained an F-measure of 0.931, ranking fifth out of 21 participants at the i2b2/VA 2010 challenge. The authors' relation annotation system ranked third out of 16 participants with a 0.709 F-measure. The 0.773 F-measure the authors obtained on concept extraction did not make it to the top 10.

conclusionOn the one hand, the authors confirm that the use of only machine-learning methods is highly dependent on the annotated training data, and thus obtained better results for well-represented classes. On the other hand, the use of only a rule-based method was not sufficient to deal with new types of data. Finally, the use of hybrid approaches combining machine-learning and rule-based approaches yielded higher scores.

Indexed as

Data MiningDecision Support Systems, ClinicalElectronic Health RecordsNatural Language ProcessingSupport Vector MachineExpert SystemsHumansSemanticsUnified Medical Language System

Identifiers

PMID21597105
PMCPMC3168313

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.