Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30658682›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2019

An efficient prototype method to identify and correct misspellings in clinical text.

T Elizabeth Workman, Yijun Shao, Guy Divita, Qing Zeng-Treitler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. CAS: corpus of clinical cases in French.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2020
    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

4 authors.

T Elizabeth WorkmanThe George Washington University, Biomedical Informatics Center, 2600 Virginia Ave, Suite 506, Washington, DC, 20037, USA. lizworkman@gwu.edu.
Yijun ShaoThe George Washington University, Biomedical Informatics Center, 2600 Virginia Ave, Suite 506, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Guy DivitaDivision of Epidemiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA.
Qing Zeng-TreitlerThe George Washington University, Biomedical Informatics Center, 2600 Virginia Ave, Suite 506, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science Institute at Childrens NationalUL1TR001876 · NCATS · CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI BELL, MICHAEL J · 2016 to 2021
$25.6M
Clinical and Translational Science Institute at Childrens National-Mentored Career Development CoreKL2TR001877 · NCATS · CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI LUBAN, NAOMI L · 2016 to 2020
$2.0M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001877NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001876U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs CRE 12-315
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMisspellings in clinical free text present challenges to natural language processing. With an objective to identify misspellings and their corrections, we developed a prototype spelling analysis method that implements Word2Vec, Levenshtein edit distance constraints, a lexical resource, and corpus term frequencies. We used the prototype method to process two different corpora, surgical pathology reports, and emergency department progress and visit notes, extracted from Veterans Health Administration resources. We evaluated performance by measuring positive predictive value and performing an error analysis of false positive output, using four classifications. We also performed an analysis of spelling errors in each corpus, using common error classifications.

resultsIn this small-scale study utilizing a total of 76,786 clinical notes, the prototype method achieved positive predictive values of 0.9057 and 0.8979, respectively, for the surgical pathology reports, and emergency department progress and visit notes, in identifying and correcting misspelled words. False positives varied by corpus. Spelling error types were similar among the two corpora, however, the authors of emergency department progress and visit notes made over four times as many errors. Overall, the results of this study suggest that this method could also perform sufficiently in identifying misspellings in other clinical document types.

Indexed as

Dictionaries as TopicNatural Language ProcessingVocabulary, ControlledAlgorithmsHumansLanguageMedical InformaticsMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedPathology, SurgicalReproducibility of ResultsResearch ReportUnified Medical Language SystemClinical textSpelling analysisSpelling correctionWord2VecWord embeddings

Identifiers

PMID30658682
PMCPMC6339425

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.