Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28750904›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of medical informatics2017

A comparison of rule-based and machine learning approaches for classifying patient portal messages.

Robert M Cronin, Daniel Fabbri, Joshua C Denny, S Trent Rosenbloom, Gretchen Purcell Jackson

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of medical informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. A systematic literature review of machine learning in online personal health data.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Robert M CroninDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. Electronic address: robert.cronin@vanderbilt.edu.
Daniel FabbriDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Computer Science, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Joshua C DennyDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
S Trent RosenbloomDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Gretchen Purcell JacksonDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA; Department of Pediatric Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.

Funding

Vanderbilt Biomedical Informatics Training ProgramT15LM007450 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Jessica S. Ancker, Bradley A. Malin · 2002 to 2026
$19.7M
NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSecure messaging through patient portals is an increasingly popular way that consumers interact with healthcare providers. The increasing burden of secure messaging can affect clinic staffing and workflows. Manual management of portal messages is costly and time consuming. Automated classification of portal messages could potentially expedite message triage and delivery of care. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe developed automated patient portal message classifiers with rule-based and machine learning techniques using bag of words and natural language processing (NLP) approaches. To evaluate classifier performance, we used a gold standard of 3253 portal messages manually categorized using a taxonomy of communication types (i.e., main categories of informational, medical, logistical, social, and other communications, and subcategories including prescriptions, appointments, problems, tests, follow-up, contact information, and acknowledgement). We evaluated our classifiers' accuracies in identifying individual communication types within portal messages with area under the receiver-operator curve (AUC). Portal messages often contain more than one type of communication. To predict all communication types within single messages, we used the Jaccard Index. We extracted the variables of importance for the random forest classifiers.

resultsThe best performing approaches to classification for the major communication types were: logistic regression for medical communications (AUC: 0.899); basic (rule-based) for informational communications (AUC: 0.842); and random forests for social communications and logistical communications (AUCs: 0.875 and 0.925, respectively). The best performing classification approach of classifiers for individual communication subtypes was random forests for Logistical-Contact Information (AUC: 0.963). The Jaccard Indices by approach were: basic classifier, Jaccard Index: 0.674; Naïve Bayes, Jaccard Index: 0.799; random forests, Jaccard Index: 0.859; and logistic regression, Jaccard Index: 0.861. For medical communications, the most predictive variables were NLP concepts (e.g., Temporal_Concept, which maps to 'morning', 'evening' and Idea_or_Concept which maps to 'appointment' and 'refill'). For logistical communications, the most predictive variables contained similar numbers of NLP variables and words (e.g., Telephone mapping to 'phone', 'insurance'). For social and informational communications, the most predictive variables were words (e.g., social: 'thanks', 'much', informational: 'question', 'mean').

conclusionsThis study applies automated classification methods to the content of patient portal messages and evaluates the application of NLP techniques on consumer communications in patient portal messages. We demonstrated that random forest and logistic regression approaches accurately classified the content of portal messages, although the best approach to classification varied by communication type. Words were the most predictive variables for classification of most communication types, although NLP variables were most predictive for medical communication types. As adoption of patient portals increases, automated techniques could assist in understanding and managing growing volumes of messages. Further work is needed to improve classification performance to potentially support message triage and answering.

Indexed as

Machine LearningNatural Language ProcessingPatient PortalsBayes TheoremCommunicationElectronic Health RecordsHealth PersonnelHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMachine learningNatural language processingPatient portalText classification

Identifiers

PMID28750904
PMCPMC5546247

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.