ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021
Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning Methods to Characterize Unstructured Patient-Reported Outcomes: Validation Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance of Natural Language Processing for Information Extraction From Electronic Health Records Within Cancer: Systematic Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Cancer Pain: A Systematic Review.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2024Pooled it
- Using natural language processing in emergency medicine health service research: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Using natural language processing to analyze unstructured patient-reported outcomes data derived from electronic health records for cancer populations: a systematic review.Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2024Pooled it
- Natural language processing with machine learning methods to analyze unstructured patient-reported outcomes derived from electronic health records: A systematic review.Artificial intelligence in medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Extraction of Pain Severity and Functional Interference From Clinical Narratives Using Domain-Informed Large Language Models: Protocol for a Development and Validation Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Identifying Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures in Oncology: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study Using ClinicalTrials.gov.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Optimizing prompting strategies improves large language model classification of pain- and fatigue-related functional impact in childhood cancer survivors.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Prediction of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Using Machine Learning, Clinical Summary Notes, and Vital Signs: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study in the United States.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- Real-world data and evidence: pioneering frontiers in precision oncology.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2025Review
- Article
- The Use of Natural Language Processing to Interpret Unstructured Patient Feedback on Health Services: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Rethinking arthritis: exploring its types and emerging management strategies.Inflammopharmacology · 2025Review
- Clinical applications of large language models in medicine and surgery: A scoping review.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Article
- The Transformative Role of Artificial Intelligence in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: Challenges and Opportunities.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Large Language Model Applications for Health Information Extraction in Oncology: Scoping Review.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- Machine Learning in Pediatric Healthcare: Current Trends, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Transforming Hospital Quality Improvement Through Harnessing the Power of Artificial Intelligence.Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare · 2024Article
- Insights Into the Patient Experience of Hormone Therapy for Early Breast Cancer Treatment Using Patient Forum Discussions and Natural Language Processing.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence to unlock real-world evidence in clinical oncology: A primer on recent advances.Cancer medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAssessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) through interviews or conversations during clinical encounters provides insightful information about survivorship.
objectiveThis study aims to test the validity of natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML) algorithms in identifying different attributes of pain interference and fatigue symptoms experienced by child and adolescent survivors of cancer versus the judgment by PRO content experts as the gold standard to validate NLP/ML algorithms.
methodsThis cross-sectional study focused on child and adolescent survivors of cancer, aged 8 to 17 years, and caregivers, from whom 391 meaning units in the pain interference domain and 423 in the fatigue domain were generated for analyses. Data were collected from the After Completion of Therapy Clinic at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. Experienced pain interference and fatigue symptoms were reported through in-depth interviews. After verbatim transcription, analyzable sentences (ie, meaning units) were semantically labeled by 2 content experts for each attribute (physical, cognitive, social, or unclassified). Two NLP/ML methods were used to extract and validate the semantic features: bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT) and Word2vec plus one of the ML methods, the support vector machine or extreme gradient boosting. Receiver operating characteristic and precision-recall curves were used to evaluate the accuracy and validity of the NLP/ML methods.
resultsCompared with Word2vec/support vector machine and Word2vec/extreme gradient boosting, BERT demonstrated higher accuracy in both symptom domains, with 0.931 (95% CI 0.905-0.957) and 0.916 (95% CI 0.887-0.941) for problems with cognitive and social attributes on pain interference, respectively, and 0.929 (95% CI 0.903-0.953) and 0.917 (95% CI 0.891-0.943) for problems with cognitive and social attributes on fatigue, respectively. In addition, BERT yielded superior areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for cognitive attributes on pain interference and fatigue domains (0.923, 95% CI 0.879-0.997; 0.948, 95% CI 0.922-0.979) and superior areas under the precision-recall curve for cognitive attributes on pain interference and fatigue domains (0.818, 95% CI 0.735-0.917; 0.855, 95% CI 0.791-0.930).
conclusionsThe BERT method performed better than the other methods. As an alternative to using standard PRO surveys, collecting unstructured PROs via interviews or conversations during clinical encounters and applying NLP/ML methods can facilitate PRO assessment in child and adolescent cancer survivors.
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.