ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2017
NegAIT: A new parser for medical text simplification using morphological, sentential and double negation.
Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2017. 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.
- Challenges and Opportunities for Professional Medical Publications Writers to Contribute to Plain Language Summaries (PLS) in an AI/ML Environment - A Consumer Health Informatics Systematic Review.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2023Pooled it
- Negation detection in Dutch clinical texts: an evaluation of rule-based and machine learning methods.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- A survey of automated methods for biomedical text simplification.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- Paragraph-level Simplification of Medical Texts.Proceedings of the conference. Association for Computational Linguistics. North American Chapter. Meeting · 2021Article
- Using Lexical Chains to Identify Text Difficulty: A Corpus Statistics and Classification Study.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2019Article
- High Throughput Phenotyping for Dimensional Psychopathology in Electronic Health Records.Biological psychiatry · 2018Article
- Cross Disciplinary Consultancy to Bridge Public Health Technical Needs and Analytic Developers: Negation Detection Use Case.Online journal of public health informatics · 2018Article
- The Role of Surface, Semantic and Grammatical Features on Simplification of Spanish Medical Texts: A User Study.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2017Article
- Natural Language Processing for EHR-Based Computational Phenotyping.IEEE/ACM transactions on computational biology and bioinformaticsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Many different text features influence text readability and content comprehension. Negation is commonly suggested as one such feature, but few general-purpose tools exist to discover negation and studies of the impact of negation on text readability are rare. In this paper, we introduce a new negation parser (NegAIT) for detecting morphological, sentential, and double negation. We evaluated the parser using a human annotated gold standard containing 500 Wikipedia sentences and achieved 95%, 89% and 67% precision with 100%, 80%, and 67% recall, respectively. We also investigate two applications of this new negation parser. First, we performed a corpus statistics study to demonstrate different negation usage in easy and difficult text. Negation usage was compared in six corpora: patient blogs (4K sentences), Cochrane reviews (91K sentences), PubMed abstracts (20K sentences), clinical trial texts (48K sentences), and English and Simple English Wikipedia articles for different medical topics (60K and 6K sentences). The most difficult text contained the least negation. However, when comparing negation types, difficult texts (i.e., Cochrane, PubMed, English Wikipedia and clinical trials) contained significantly (p<0.01) more morphological negations. Second, we conducted a predictive analytics study to show the importance of negation in distinguishing between easy and difficulty text. Five binary classifiers (Naïve Bayes, SVM, decision tree, logistic regression and linear regression) were trained using only negation information. All classifiers achieved better performance than the majority baseline. The Naïve Bayes' classifier achieved the highest accuracy at 77% (9% higher than the majority baseline).
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.