ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2019
Cost-aware active learning for named entity recognition in clinical text.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2019. 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.
- Semantic Similarity Search Approach to Extract Exemplars of Stigmatizing and Positive Language in Obstetric Clinical Notes: Exploratory Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Context matching is not reasoning when performing generalized clinical evaluation of generative language models.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Utilizing active learning strategies in machine-assisted annotation for clinical named entity recognition: a comprehensive analysis considering annotation costs and target effectiveness.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Active Learning Pipeline to Identify Candidate Terms for a CDSS Ontology.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2024Article
- A Systematic Approach to Configuring MetaMap for Optimal Performance.Methods of information in medicine · 2022Article
- Social and Behavioral Determinants of Health in the Era of Artificial Intelligence with Electronic Health Records: A Scoping Review.Health data science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveActive Learning (AL) attempts to reduce annotation cost (ie, time) by selecting the most informative examples for annotation. Most approaches tacitly (and unrealistically) assume that the cost for annotating each sample is identical. This study introduces a cost-aware AL method, which simultaneously models both the annotation cost and the informativeness of the samples and evaluates both via simulation and user studies. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe designed a novel, cost-aware AL algorithm (Cost-CAUSE) for annotating clinical named entities; we first utilized lexical and syntactic features to estimate annotation cost, then we incorporated this cost measure into an existing AL algorithm. Using the 2010 i2b2/VA data set, we then conducted a simulation study comparing Cost-CAUSE with noncost-aware AL methods, and a user study comparing Cost-CAUSE with passive learning.
resultsOur cost model fit empirical annotation data well, and Cost-CAUSE increased the simulation area under the learning curve (ALC) scores by up to 5.6% and 4.9%, compared with random sampling and alternate AL methods. Moreover, in a user annotation task, Cost-CAUSE outperformed passive learning on the ALC score and reduced annotation time by 20.5%-30.2%. DISCUSSION: Although AL has proven effective in simulations, our user study shows that a real-world environment is far more complex. Other factors have a noticeable effect on the AL method, such as the annotation accuracy of users, the tiredness of users, and even the physical and mental condition of users.
conclusionCost-CAUSE saves significant annotation cost compared to random sampling.
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.