ArticleJournal of medical systems2018
Healthcare Text Classification System and its Performance Evaluation: A Source of Better Intelligence by Characterizing Healthcare Text.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction of Alzheimer's disease progression within 6 years using speech: A novel approach leveraging language models.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- A Machine Learning Based Framework to Identify and Classify Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in a Large-Scale Population.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Use of Automated Thematic Annotations for Small Data Sets in a Psychotherapeutic Context: Systematic Review of Machine Learning Algorithms.JMIR mental health · 2021Review
- Classification and prediction of diabetes disease using machine learning paradigm.Health information science and systems · 2020Article
- RSMOTE: improving classification performance over imbalanced medical datasets.Health information science and systems · 2020Article
- Identification of Potential Type II Diabetes in a Large-Scale Chinese Population Using a Systematic Machine Learning Framework.Journal of diabetes research · 2020Article
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
A machine learning (ML)-based text classification system has several classifiers. The performance evaluation (PE) of the ML system is typically driven by the training data size and the partition protocols used. Such systems lead to low accuracy because the text classification systems lack the ability to model the input text data in terms of noise characteristics. This research study proposes a concept of misrepresentation ratio (MRR) on input healthcare text data and models the PE criteria for validating the hypothesis. Further, such a novel system provides a platform to amalgamate several attributes of the ML system such as: data size, classifier type, partitioning protocol and percentage MRR. Our comprehensive data analysis consisted of five types of text data sets (TwitterA, WebKB4, Disease, Reuters (R8), and SMS); five kinds of classifiers (support vector machine with linear kernel (SVM-L), MLP-based neural network, AdaBoost, stochastic gradient descent and decision tree); and five types of training protocols (K2, K4, K5, K10 and JK). Using the decreasing order of MRR, our ML system demonstrates the mean classification accuracies as: 70.13 ± 0.15%, 87.34 ± 0.06%, 93.73 ± 0.03%, 94.45 ± 0.03% and 97.83 ± 0.01%, respectively, using all the classifiers and protocols. The corresponding AUC is 0.98 for SMS data using Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) based neural network. All the classifiers, the best accuracy of 91.84 ± 0.04% is shown to be of MLP-based neural network and this is 6% better over previously published. Further we observed that as MRR decreases, the system robustness increases and validated by standard deviations. The overall text system accuracy using all data types, classifiers, protocols is 89%, thereby showing the entire ML system to be novel, robust and unique. The system is also tested for stability and reliability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29654417What 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.