ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2015
Semi-supervised Learning for Phenotyping Tasks.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre-training phenotyping classifiers.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2021Article
- DDL: Deep Dictionary Learning for Predictive Phenotyping.IJCAI : proceedings of the conference · 2019Article
- Clinical Document Classification Using Labeled and Unlabeled Data Across Hospitals.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Supervised learning is the dominant approach to automatic electronic health records-based phenotyping, but it is expensive due to the cost of manual chart review. Semi-supervised learning takes advantage of both scarce labeled and plentiful unlabeled data. In this work, we study a family of semi-supervised learning algorithms based on Expectation Maximization (EM) in the context of several phenotyping tasks. We first experiment with the basic EM algorithm. When the modeling assumptions are violated, basic EM leads to inaccurate parameter estimation. Augmented EM attenuates this shortcoming by introducing a weighting factor that downweights the unlabeled data. Cross-validation does not always lead to the best setting of the weighting factor and other heuristic methods may be preferred. We show that accurate phenotyping models can be trained with only a few hundred labeled (and a large number of unlabeled) examples, potentially providing substantial savings in the amount of the required manual chart review.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26958183PMC4765699What 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.