ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2021
Pre-training phenotyping classifiers.
Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and evaluation of machine learning models for the detection of emergency department patients with opioid misuse from clinical notes.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Exploring Novel Fentanyl Analogues Using a Graph-Based Transformer Model.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent transformer-based pre-trained language models have become a de facto standard for many text classification tasks. Nevertheless, their utility in the clinical domain, where classification is often performed at encounter or patient level, is still uncertain due to the limitation on the maximum length of input. In this work, we introduce a self-supervised method for pre-training that relies on a masked token objective and is free from the limitation on the maximum input length. We compare the proposed method with supervised pre-training that uses billing codes as a source of supervision. We evaluate the proposed method on one publicly-available and three in-house datasets using the standard evaluation metrics such as the area under the ROC curve and F1 score. We find that, surprisingly, even though self-supervised pre-training performs slightly worse than supervised, it still preserves most of the gains from pre-training.
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.