Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33290879›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2021

Language models are an effective representation learning technique for electronic health record data.

Ethan Steinberg, Ken Jung, Jason A Fries, Conor K Corbin, Stephen R Pfohl, Nigam H Shah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 62 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing 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

62 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. Augmenting Electronic Health Records for Adverse Event Detection.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Evaluation of Large Language Models as Emergency Department Revisit Predictors.Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Ethan SteinbergStanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: ethanid@stanford.edu.
Ken JungStanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Jason A FriesStanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Conor K CorbinStanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Stephen R PfohlStanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Nigam H ShahStanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.

Funding

Methods for generalized ontology terms enrichment analysisR01LM011369 · NLM · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI SHAH, NIGAM H · 2013 to 2020
$5.0M
Biomedical Data Science Graduate Training at StanfordT32LM012409 · NLM · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI PLEVRITIS, SYLVIA KATINA · 2016 to 2020
$1.5M
NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011369NLM NIH HHS T32 LM012409
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) has fueled the development of using machine learning to build prediction models for various clinical outcomes. However, this process is often constrained by having a relatively small number of patient records for training the model. We demonstrate that using patient representation schemes inspired from techniques in natural language processing can increase the accuracy of clinical prediction models by transferring information learned from the entire patient population to the task of training a specific model, where only a subset of the population is relevant. Such patient representation schemes enable a 3.5% mean improvement in AUROC on five prediction tasks compared to standard baselines, with the average improvement rising to 19% when only a small number of patient records are available for training the clinical prediction model.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsModels, StatisticalHumansMachine LearningNatural Language ProcessingPrognosisElectronic health recordMachine learningRepresentation learningRisk stratificationTransfer learning

Identifiers

PMID33290879
PMCPMC7863633

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.