Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28269941›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2016

Accelerating Chart Review Using Automated Methods on Electronic Health Record Data for Postoperative Complications.

Zhen Hu, Genevieve B Melton, Nathan D Moeller, Elliot G Arsoniadis, Yan Wang, Mary R Kwaan, Eric H Jensen, Gyorgy J Simon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Characterizing Functional Health Status of Surgical Patients in Clinical Notes.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2018
    Article
  19. Characterizing Surgical Site Infection Signals in Clinical Notes.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2017
    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

8 authors.

Zhen HuInstitute for Health Informatics.
Genevieve B MeltonInstitute for Health Informatics; Department of Surgery.
Nathan D MoellerDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering.
Elliot G ArsoniadisInstitute for Health Informatics; Department of Surgery.
Yan WangInstitute for Health Informatics.
Mary R KwaanDepartment of Surgery.
Eric H JensenDepartment of Surgery.
Gyorgy J SimonInstitute for Health Informatics; Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, MN.

Funding

University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR000114 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R · 2012 to 2015
$35.0M
Leveraging the EHR to Collect and Analyze Social, Behavioral & Familial FactorsR01LM011364 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI CHEN, ELIZABETH S., MELTON-MEAUX, GENEVIEVE B · 2012 to 2015
$1.4M
Extracting Typical and Atypical Disease Progression Patterns from Multi-Site EHRR01LM011972 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI SIMON, GYORGY · 2015 to 2018
$1.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000114NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011364NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011972
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Manual Chart Review (MCR) is an important but labor-intensive task for clinical research and quality improvement. In this study, aiming to accelerate the process of extracting postoperative outcomes from medical charts, we developed an automated postoperative complications detection application by using structured electronic health record (EHR) data. We applied several machine learning methods to the detection of commonly occurring complications, including three subtypes of surgical site infection, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, sepsis, and septic shock. Particularly, we applied one single-task and five multi-task learning methods and compared their detection performance. The models demonstrated high detection performance, which ensures the feasibility of accelerating MCR. Specifically, one of the multi-task learning methods, propensity weighted observations (PWO) demonstrated the highest detection performance, with single-task learning being a close second.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsMachine LearningAlgorithmsHumansMedical AuditPneumoniaPostoperative ComplicationsSepsisShock, SepticSurgical Wound InfectionUrinary Tract Infections

Identifiers

PMID28269941
PMCPMC5333220

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.