ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2021
Natural language inference for curation of structured clinical registries from unstructured text.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Using natural language processing to extract information from clinical text in electronic medical records for populating clinical registries: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Pooled it
- Tumor data extraction from unstructured medical reports: application of an artificial intelligence-enhanced tool in the Eastern Switzerland Cancer Registry.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Natural language processing of biomedical text to map and prioritize protein-disease associations in HFpEF.Computers in biology and medicine · 2026Article
- LLM-augmented semantic embeddings enable Cross-Lingual mapping of medical procedure terms.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Large Language Model Applications for Health Information Extraction in Oncology: Scoping Review.JMIR cancer · 2025Article
- Multifaceted Natural Language Processing Task-Based Evaluation of Bidirectional Encoder Representations From Transformers Models for Bilingual (Korean and English) Clinical Notes: Algorithm Development and Validation.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- Automating surgical procedure extraction for society of surgeons adult cardiac surgery registry using pretrained language models.JAMIA open · 2024Article
- Toward structuring real-world data: Deep learning for extracting oncology information from clinical text with patient-level supervision.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Year 2021: COVID-19, Information Extraction and BERTization among the Hottest Topics in Medical Natural Language Processing.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2022Article
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
objectiveClinical registries-structured databases of demographic, diagnosis, and treatment information-play vital roles in retrospective studies, operational planning, and assessment of patient eligibility for research, including clinical trials. Registry curation, a manual and time-intensive process, is always costly and often impossible for rare or underfunded diseases. Our goal was to evaluate the feasibility of natural language inference (NLI) as a scalable solution for registry curation. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe applied five state-of-the-art, pretrained, deep learning-based NLI models to clinical, laboratory, and pathology notes to infer information about 43 different breast oncology registry fields. Model inferences were evaluated against a manually curated, 7439 patient breast oncology research database.
resultsNLI models showed considerable variation in performance, both within and across fields. One model, ALBERT, outperformed the others (BART, RoBERTa, XLNet, and ELECTRA) on 22 out of 43 fields. A detailed error analysis revealed that incorrect inferences primarily arose through models' tendency to misinterpret historical findings, as well as confusion based on abbreviations and subtle term variants common in clinical text. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionTraditional natural language processing methods require specially annotated training sets or the construction of a separate model for each registry field. In contrast, a single pretrained NLI model can curate dozens of different fields simultaneously. Surprisingly, NLI methods remain unexplored in the clinical domain outside the realm of shared tasks and benchmarks. Modern NLI models could increase the efficiency of registry curation, even when applied "out of the box" with no additional training.
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.