ArticleJournal of biomedical semantics2021
Synthetic data for annotation and extraction of family history information from clinical text.
Article in Journal of biomedical semantics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temporal Annotation of German Clinical Language in Real and Synthetic Clinical Documents: Corpus Development and Baseline Tagger Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Denoising autoencoder framework for reconstructing missing periodontal clinical records.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Association of Parity with the Risks of Gestational Diabetes and Macrosomia: A Retrospective Cohort Study in Nanjing, China.Current pharmaceutical design · 2024Article
- A survey on clinical natural language processing in the United Kingdom from 2007 to 2022.NPJ digital medicine · 2022Review
- Year 2021: COVID-19, Information Extraction and BERTization among the Hottest Topics in Medical Natural Language Processing.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2022Article
- Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on birth outcomes: A retrospective cohort study in Nanjing, China.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes After Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Retrospective Cohort Study in China.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Prefrontal fNIRS-based clinical data analysis of brain functions in individuals abusing different types of drugs.Journal of biomedical semantics · 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
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe limited availability of clinical texts for Natural Language Processing purposes is hindering the progress of the field. This article investigates the use of synthetic data for the annotation and automated extraction of family history information from Norwegian clinical text. We make use of incrementally developed synthetic clinical text describing patients' family history relating to cases of cardiac disease and present a general methodology which integrates the synthetically produced clinical statements and annotation guideline development. The resulting synthetic corpus contains 477 sentences and 6030 tokens. In this work we experimentally assess the validity and applicability of the annotated synthetic corpus using machine learning techniques and furthermore evaluate the system trained on synthetic text on a corpus of real clinical text, consisting of de-identified records for patients with genetic heart disease.
resultsFor entity recognition, an SVM trained on synthetic data had class weighted precision, recall and F
conclusionsA system for extraction of family history information developed on synthetic data generalizes well to real, clinical notes with a small loss of accuracy. The methodology outlined in this paper may be useful in other situations where limited availability of clinical text hinders NLP tasks. Both the annotation guidelines and the annotated synthetic corpus are made freely available and as such constitutes the first publicly available resource of Norwegian clinical text.
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.