ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2018
Identifying direct temporal relations between time and events from clinical notes.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Entity and relation extraction from clinical case reports of COVID-19: a natural language processing approach.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Temporal disambiguation of relative temporal expressions in clinical texts.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2022Article
- Temporal Expression Classification and Normalization From Chinese Narrative Clinical Texts: Pattern Learning Approach.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Introduction: selected extended articles from the 2nd International Workshop on Semantics-Powered Data Analytics (SEPDA 2017).BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018Article
- A Discrete Joint Model for Entity and Relation Extraction from Clinical Notes.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational ScienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMost of the current work on clinical temporal relation identification follows the convention developed in the general domain, aiming to identify a comprehensive set of temporal relations from a document including both explicit and implicit relations. While such a comprehensive set can represent temporal information in a document in a complete manner, some of the temporal relations in the comprehensive set may not be essential depending on the clinical application of interest. Moreover, as the types of evidence that should be used to identify explicit and implicit relations are different, current clinical temporal relation identification systems that target both explicit and implicit relations still show low performances for practical use.
methodsIn this paper, we propose to focus on a sub-task of conventional temporal relation identification task in order to provide insight into building practical temporal relation identification modules for clinical text. We focus on identification of direct temporal relations, a subset of temporal relations that is chosen to minimize the amount of inference required to identify the relations. A corpus on direct temporal relations between time expressions and event mentions is constructed, and an automatic system tailored for direct temporal relations is developed.
resultsIt is shown that the direct temporal relations constitute a major category of temporal relations that contain important information needed for clinical applications. The system optimized for direct temporal relations achieves better performance than the state-of-the-art system developed with comprehensive set of both explicit and implicit relations in mind.
conclusionsWe expect direct temporal relations to facilitate the development of practical temporal information extraction tools in clinical domain.
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.