Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31512729›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2019

Evaluating shallow and deep learning strategies for the 2018 n2c2 shared task on clinical text classification.

Michel Oleynik, Amila Kugic, Zdenko Kasáč, Markus Kreuzthaler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. [Artificial intelligence based Chinese clinical trials eligibility criteria classification].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Cohort selection for clinical trials: n2c2 2018 shared task track 1.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019
    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.

Michel OleynikInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Amila KugicInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Zdenko KasáčInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Markus KreuzthalerInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.

Funding

National NLP Clinical Challenges (n2c2): Challenges in Natural Language Processing for Clinical NarrativesR13LM013127 · NLM · GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY · PI UZUNER, OZLEM · 2019 to 2023
$100k
Challenges in Natural Language Processing in Clinical TextR13LM011411 · NLM · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT ALBANY · PI UZUNER, OZLEM · 2012 to 2016
$98k
NLM NIH HHS R13 LM011411NLM NIH HHS R13 LM013127
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAutomated clinical phenotyping is challenging because word-based features quickly turn it into a high-dimensional problem, in which the small, privacy-restricted, training datasets might lead to overfitting. Pretrained embeddings might solve this issue by reusing input representation schemes trained on a larger dataset. We sought to evaluate shallow and deep learning text classifiers and the impact of pretrained embeddings in a small clinical dataset. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe participated in the 2018 National NLP Clinical Challenges (n2c2) Shared Task on cohort selection and received an annotated dataset with medical narratives of 202 patients for multilabel binary text classification. We set our baseline to a majority classifier, to which we compared a rule-based classifier and orthogonal machine learning strategies: support vector machines, logistic regression, and long short-term memory neural networks. We evaluated logistic regression and long short-term memory using both self-trained and pretrained BioWordVec word embeddings as input representation schemes.

resultsRule-based classifier showed the highest overall micro F1 score (0.9100), with which we finished first in the challenge. Shallow machine learning strategies showed lower overall micro F1 scores, but still higher than deep learning strategies and the baseline. We could not show a difference in classification efficiency between self-trained and pretrained embeddings. DISCUSSION: Clinical context, negation, and value-based criteria hindered shallow machine learning approaches, while deep learning strategies could not capture the term diversity due to the small training dataset.

conclusionShallow methods for clinical phenotyping can still outperform deep learning methods in small imbalanced data, even when supported by pretrained embeddings.

Indexed as

Machine LearningNatural Language ProcessingPatient SelectionClassificationClinical Trials as TopicData MiningDeep LearningHumansLogistic ModelsNeural Networks, Computerdata miningdeep learningmachine learningnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID31512729
PMCPMC6798565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.