ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
Using domain knowledge and domain-inspired discourse model for coreference resolution for clinical narratives.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Collecting specialty-related medical terms: Development and evaluation of a resource for Spanish.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Recent Advances in Clinical Natural Language Processing in Support of Semantic Analysis.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2015Review
- "Big data" and the electronic health record.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2014Review
- Mission and Sustainability of Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside (i2b2).EGEMS (Washington, DC) · 2014Article
- Document Sublanguage Clustering to Detect Medical Specialty in Cross-institutional Clinical Texts.Proceedings of the ACM ... International Workshop on Data and Text Mining in Biomedical Informatics. ACM International Workshop on Data and Text Mining in Biomedical InformaticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis paper presents a coreference resolution system for clinical narratives. Coreference resolution aims at clustering all mentions in a single document to coherent entities. MATERIALS AND
methodsA knowledge-intensive approach for coreference resolution is employed. The domain knowledge used includes several domain-specific lists, a knowledge intensive mention parsing, and task informed discourse model. Mention parsing allows us to abstract over the surface form of the mention and represent each mention using a higher-level representation, which we call the mention's semantic representation (SR). SR reduces the mention to a standard form and hence provides better support for comparing and matching. Existing coreference resolution systems tend to ignore discourse aspects and rely heavily on lexical and structural cues in the text. The authors break from this tradition and present a discourse model for "person" type mentions in clinical narratives, which greatly simplifies the coreference resolution.
resultsThis system was evaluated on four different datasets which were made available in the 2011 i2b2/VA coreference challenge. The unweighted average of F1 scores (over B-cubed, MUC and CEAF) varied from 84.2% to 88.1%. These experiments show that domain knowledge is effective for different mention types for all the datasets. DISCUSSION: Error analysis shows that most of the recall errors made by the system can be handled by further addition of domain knowledge. The precision errors, on the other hand, are more subtle and indicate the need to understand the relations in which mentions participate for building a robust coreference system.
conclusionThis paper presents an approach that makes an extensive use of domain knowledge to significantly improve coreference resolution. The authors state that their system and the knowledge sources developed will be made publicly available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.