ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2013
Improved de-identification of physician notes through integrative modeling of both public and private medical text.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence for diagnosing exudative age-related macular degeneration.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- A certified de-identification system for all clinical text documents for information extraction at scale.JAMIA open · 2023Article
- Building a best-in-class automated de-identification tool for electronic health records through ensemble learning.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Article
- Protected Health Information filter (Philter): accurately and securely de-identifying free-text clinical notes.NPJ digital medicine · 2020Article
- Phelan-McDermid syndrome data network: Integrating patient reported outcomes with clinical notes and curated genetic reports.American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics · 2018Article
- A hybrid approach to automatic de-identification of psychiatric notes.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2017Article
- Clinical Data Reuse or Secondary Use: Current Status and Potential Future Progress.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2017Review
- Leveraging existing corpora for de-identification of psychiatric notes using domain adaptation.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2017Article
- Automatic detection of protected health information from clinic narratives.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2015Article
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
Abstract
backgroundPhysician notes routinely recorded during patient care represent a vast and underutilized resource for human disease studies on a population scale. Their use in research is primarily limited by the need to separate confidential patient information from clinical annotations, a process that is resource-intensive when performed manually. This study seeks to create an automated method for de-identifying physician notes that does not require large amounts of private information: in addition to training a model to recognize Protected Health Information (PHI) within private physician notes, we reverse the problem and train a model to recognize non-PHI words and phrases that appear in public medical texts.
methodsPublic and private medical text sources were analyzed to distinguish common medical words and phrases from Protected Health Information. Patient identifiers are generally nouns and numbers that appear infrequently in medical literature. To quantify this relationship, term frequencies and part of speech tags were compared between journal publications and physician notes. Standard medical concepts and phrases were then examined across ten medical dictionaries. Lists and rules were included from the US census database and previously published studies. In total, 28 features were used to train decision tree classifiers.
resultsThe model successfully recalled 98% of PHI tokens from 220 discharge summaries. Cost sensitive classification was used to weight recall over precision (98% F10 score, 76% F1 score). More than half of the false negatives were the word "of" appearing in a hospital name. All patient names, phone numbers, and home addresses were at least partially redacted. Medical concepts such as "elevated white blood cell count" were informative for de-identification. The results exceed the previously approved criteria established by four Institutional Review Boards.
conclusionsThe results indicate that distributional differences between private and public medical text can be used to accurately classify PHI. The data and algorithms reported here are made freely available for evaluation and improvement.
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.