ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2018
Improving the Path from Diagnoses to Documentation: A Cognitive Review Tool for Clinical Notes and Administrative Records.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
EMR systems are intended to improve patient-centered care management and hospital administrative processing. However, the information stored in EMRs can be disorganized, incomplete, or inconsistent, creating problems at the patient and system level. We present a technology that reconciles inconsistencies between clinical diagnoses and administrative records by analyzing free-text notes, problem lists and recorded diagnoses in real time. A fully integrated pipeline has been developed for efficient, knowledge-driven extraction, normalization, and matching of disease terms among structured and unstructured data, with modular precision of 94-98% on over 1000 patients. This cognitive data review tool improves the path from diagnosis to documentation, facilitating accurate and timely clinical and administrative decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30815092PMC6371384What 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.