ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2017
Automatic health record review to help prioritize gravely ill Social Security disability applicants.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contribution of artificial intelligence research to the development of inclusive applications for people with disabilities: A scoping review (2015-2025).PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Broadening horizons: the case for capturing function and the role of health informatics in its use.BMC public health · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEvery year, thousands of patients die waiting for disability benefits from the Social Security Administration. Some qualify for expedited service under the Compassionate Allowance (CAL) initiative, but CAL software focuses exclusively on information from a single form field. This paper describes the development of a supplemental process for identifying some overlooked but gravely ill applicants, through automatic annotation of health records accompanying new claims. We explore improved prioritization instead of fully autonomous claims approval. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe developed a sample of claims containing medical records at the moment of arrival in a single office. A series of tools annotated both patient records and public Web page descriptions of CAL medical conditions. We trained random forests to identify CAL patients and validated each model with 10-fold cross validation.
resultsOur main model, a general CAL classifier, had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.915. Combining this classifier with existing software improved sensitivity from 0.960 to 0.994, detecting every deceased patient, but reducing positive predictive value to 0.216. DISCUSSION: True positive CAL identification is a priority, given CAL patient mortality. Mere prioritization of the false positives would not create a meaningful burden in terms of manual review. Death certificate data suggest the presence of truly ill patients among putative false positives.
conclusionTo a limited extent, it is possible to identify gravely ill Social Security disability applicants by analyzing annotations of unstructured electronic health records, and the level of identification is sufficient to be useful in prioritizing case reviews.
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.