Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31655273›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2019

Ensembles of natural language processing systems for portable phenotyping solutions.

Cong Liu, Casey N Ta, James R Rogers, Ziran Li, Junghwan Lee, Alex M Butler, Ning Shang, Fabricio Sampaio Peres Kury, Liwei Wang, Feichen Shen and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. CQL4NLP: Development and Integration of FHIR NLP Extensions in Clinical Quality Language for EHR-driven Phenotyping.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science
    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

14 authors.

Cong LiuDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Casey N TaDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
James R RogersDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Ziran LiDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Junghwan LeeDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Alex M ButlerDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Ning ShangDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Fabricio Sampaio Peres KuryDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Liwei WangDivision of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55901, USA.
Feichen ShenDivision of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55901, USA.
Hongfang LiuDivision of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55901, USA.
Lyudmila EnaDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Carol FriedmanDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Chunhua WengDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA. Electronic address: cw2384@columbia.edu.

Funding

OMOP information model for eMERGE phenotypingU01HG008680 · NHGRI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Wendy K Chung, GEORGE M HRIPCSAK · 2015 to 2026
$13.3M
Bridging the Semantic Gap Between Research Eligibility Criteria and Clinical DataR01LM009886 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI WENG, CHUNHUA · 2009 to 2020
$5.3M
SHORT-TERM TRAINING: STUDENTS IN PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLST35HL007616 · NHLBI · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI RUDOLPH L LEIBEL, Markus Y Mapara · 1985 to 2026
$4.4M
Deep phenotyping in Electronic Health Records for Genomic MedicineR01LM012895 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI WANG, KAI, WENG, CHUNHUA · 2018 to 2021
$3.3M
Deep learning based predictive analytics to improve patient health.R01LM013061 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Krzysztof Kiryluk, CHUNHUA WENG · 2019 to 2026
$2.7M
NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008680NHLBI NIH HHS T35 HL007616NLM NIH HHS R01 LM009886NLM NIH HHS R01 LM012895NLM NIH HHS R01 LM013061
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundManually curating standardized phenotypic concepts such as Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) terms from narrative text in electronic health records (EHRs) is time consuming and error prone. Natural language processing (NLP) techniques can facilitate automated phenotype extraction and thus improve the efficiency of curating clinical phenotypes from clinical texts. While individual NLP systems can perform well for a single cohort, an ensemble-based method might shed light on increasing the portability of NLP pipelines across different cohorts.

methodsWe compared four NLP systems, MetaMapLite, MedLEE, ClinPhen and cTAKES, and four ensemble techniques, including intersection, union, majority-voting and machine learning, for extracting generic phenotypic concepts. We addressed two important research questions regarding automated phenotype recognition. First, we evaluated the performance of different approaches in identifying generic phenotypic concepts. Second, we compared the performance of different methods to identify patient-specific phenotypic concepts. To better quantify the effects caused by concept granularity differences on performance, we developed a novel evaluation metric that considered concept hierarchies and frequencies. Each of the approaches was evaluated on a gold standard set of clinical documents annotated by clinical experts. One dataset containing 1,609 concepts derived from 50 clinical notes from two different institutions was used in both evaluations, and an additional dataset of 608 concepts derived from 50 case report abstracts obtained from PubMed was used for evaluation of identifying generic phenotypic concepts only.

resultsFor generic phenotypic concept recognition, the top three performers in the NYP/CUIMC dataset are union ensemble (F

conclusionsOur study demonstrates that ensembles of natural language processing can improve both generic phenotypic concept recognition and patient specific phenotypic concept identification over individual systems. Among the individual NLP systems, each individual system performed best when they were applied in the dataset that they were primary designed for. However, combining multiple NLP systems to create an ensemble can generally improve the performance. Specifically, the ensemble can increase the results reproducibility across different cohorts and tasks, and thus provide a more portable phenotyping solution compared to individual NLP systems.

Indexed as

Natural Language ProcessingPhenotypeDatasets as TopicElectronic Health RecordsHumansReproducibility of ResultsConcept recognitionEnsemble methodEvaluationHuman phenotype ontologyNatural language processingReproducibility

Identifiers

PMID31655273
PMCPMC6899194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.