ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2020
A Preliminary Characterization of Canonicalized and Non-Canonicalized Section Headers Across Variable Clinical Note Types.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Improving Clinical Documentation with Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review.Perspectives in health information management · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the electronic health record, the majority of clinically relevant information is stored within clinical notes. Most clinical notes follow a set organizational structure composed of canonicalized section headers that facilitate clinical review and information gathering. Standardized section header terminologies such as the SecTag terminology permit the identification and standardization of headers to a canonicalized form. Although the SecTag terminology has been evaluated extensively for history & physical notes, the coverage of canonical section header terms has not been assessed across other note types. For this pilot study, we conducted a coverage study and characterization of canonical section headers across 5 common, clinical note types and a generalizability study of canonical section headers detected within two types of clinical notes from Penn Medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33936503PMC8075444What 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.