Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22195097›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2011

An evaluation of the UMLS in representing corpus derived clinical concepts.

Jeff Friedlin, Marc Overhage

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The suitability of UMLS and SNOMED-CT for encoding outcome concepts.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Automatic Generation of Conditional Diagnostic Guidelines.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2016
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. OTO: Ontology Term Organizer.BMC bioinformatics · 2015
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors.

Jeff FriedlinRegenstrief Institute, Inc., Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Marc Overhage

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We performed an evaluation of the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) in representing concepts derived from medical narrative documents from three domains: chest x-ray reports, discharge summaries and admission notes. We detected concepts in these documents by identifying noun phrases (NPs) and N-grams, including unigrams (single words), bigrams (word pairs) and trigrams (word triples). After removing NPs and N-grams that did not represent discrete clinical concepts, we processed the remaining with the UMLS MetaMap program. We manually reviewed the results of MetaMap processing to determine whether MetaMap found full, partial or no representation of the concept. For full representations, we determined whether post-coordination was required. Our results showed that a large portion of concepts found in clinical narrative documents are either unrepresented or poorly represented in the current version of the UMLS Metathesaurus and that post-coordination was often required in order to fully represent a concept.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsNatural Language ProcessingRadiology Information SystemsUnified Medical Language SystemHumansPatient AdmissionPatient DischargeRadiography, Thoracic

Identifiers

PMID22195097
PMCPMC3243131

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.