ArticleJAMIA open2020
Natural language processing systems for pathology parsing in limited data environments with uncertainty estimation.
Article in JAMIA open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Performance of Natural Language Processing for Information Extraction From Electronic Health Records Within Cancer: Systematic Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence Applications for Automated Data Extraction and Secondary Use of Clinical Information in Uro-oncology: A Systematic Review.European urology open science · 2026Review
- Development and Validation of a Generative Artificial Intelligence-Based Pipeline for Automated Clinical Data Extraction From Electronic Health Records: Technical Implementation Study.JMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Supporting cancer research on real-world data: extracting colorectal cancer status and explicitly written TNM stages from free-text imaging and histopathology reports.BMJ health & care informatics · 2025Article
- Article
- ImpACT Project: Improving Access to Clinical Trials in Victoria, an Artificial Intelligence-Based Approach.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
- Computational pathology: A survey review and the way forward.Journal of pathology informatics · 2024Review
- A comparative study of large language model-based zero-shot inference and task-specific supervised classification of breast cancer pathology reports.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Natural Language Processing: from Bedside to Everywhere.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2022Article
- An accessible, efficient, and accurate natural language processing method for extracting diagnostic data from pathology reports.Journal of pathology informatics · 2022Article
- Automatic Classification of Cancer Pathology Reports: A Systematic Review.Journal of pathology informatics · 2022Article
- Electronic case report forms generation from pathology reports by ARGO, automatic record generator for onco-hematology.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Improving natural language information extraction from cancer pathology reports using transfer learning and zero-shot string similarity.JAMIA open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCancer is a leading cause of death, but much of the diagnostic information is stored as unstructured data in pathology reports. We aim to improve uncertainty estimates of machine learning-based pathology parsers and evaluate performance in low data settings. MATERIALS AND
methodsOur data comes from the Urologic Outcomes Database at UCSF which includes 3232 annotated prostate cancer pathology reports from 2001 to 2018. We approach 17 separate information extraction tasks, involving a wide range of pathologic features. To handle the diverse range of fields, we required 2 statistical models, a document classification method for pathologic features with a small set of possible values and a token extraction method for pathologic features with a large set of values. For each model, we used isotonic calibration to improve the model's estimates of its likelihood of being correct.
resultsOur best document classifier method, a convolutional neural network, achieves a weighted F1 score of 0.97 averaged over 12 fields and our best extraction method achieves an accuracy of 0.93 averaged over 5 fields. The performance saturates as a function of dataset size with as few as 128 data points. Furthermore, while our document classifier methods have reliable uncertainty estimates, our extraction-based methods do not, but after isotonic calibration, expected calibration error drops to below 0.03 for all extraction fields.
conclusionsWe find that when applying machine learning to pathology parsing, large datasets may not always be needed, and that calibration methods can improve the reliability of uncertainty estimates.
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.