Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32477636›Full record

ArticleAMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science2020

Natural Language Processing for the Evaluation of Methodological Standards and Best Practices of EHR-based Clinical Research.

Sunyang Fu, Luke A Carlson, Kevin J Peterson, Nan Wang, Xin Zhou, Suyuan Peng, Jun Jiang, Yanshan Wang, Jennifer St Sauver, Hongfang Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science, 2020. 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. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Clinical concept extraction: A methodology review.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2020
    Review
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

10 authors.

Sunyang FuDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Luke A CarlsonDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Kevin J PetersonDepartment of Information Technology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Nan WangUniversity of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN.
Xin ZhouDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Suyuan PengDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Jun JiangDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Yanshan WangDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Jennifer St SauverDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Hongfang LiuDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The effective use of EHR data for clinical research is challenged by the lack of methodologic standards, transparency, and reproducibility. For example, our empirical analysis on clinical research ontologies and reporting standards found little-to-no informatics-related standards. To address these issues, our study aims to leverage natural language processing techniques to discover the reporting patterns and data abstraction methodologies for EHR-based clinical research. We conducted a case study using a collection of full articles of EHR-based population studies published using the Rochester Epidemiology Project infrastructure. Our investigation discovered an upward trend of reporting EHR-related research methodologies, good practice, and the use of informatics related methods. For example, among 1279 articles, 24.0% reported training for data abstraction, 6% reported the abstractors were blinded, 4.5% tested the inter-observer agreement, 5% reported the use of a screening/data collection protocol, 1.5% reported that team meetings were organized for consensus building, and 0.8% mentioned supervision activities by senior researchers. Despite that, the overall ratio of reporting/adoption of methodologic standards was still low. There was also a high variation regarding clinical research reporting. Thus, continuously developing process frameworks, ontologies, and reporting guidelines for promoting good data practice in EHR-based clinical research are recommended.

Identifiers

PMID32477636
PMCPMC7233049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.