ArticleJournal of pain and symptom management2022
Mixed-methods evaluation of three natural language processing modeling approaches for measuring documented goals-of-care discussions in the electronic health record.
Article in Journal of pain and symptom management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Improving Clinical Documentation with Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review.Perspectives in health information management · 2024Pooled it
- Assessment of Natural Language Processing of Electronic Health Records to Measure Goals-of-Care Discussions as a Clinical Trial Outcome.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Characterizing Survivors Living With Likely Incurable Cancer: A Closer Look at an Emerging Population.JCO oncology practice · 2026Review
- A modular pipeline for natural language processing-screened human abstraction of a pragmatic trial outcome from electronic health records.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Article
- Assessment of a Zero-Shot Large Language Model in Measuring Documented Goals-of-Care Discussions.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2026Article
- A modular pipeline for natural language processing-screened human abstraction of a pragmatic trial outcome from electronic health records.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Performance of Predefined Search Patterns for Identifying Documented Goals-of-Care Discussions in Inpatient Electronic Health Records.Journal of palliative medicine · 2025Article
- Detecting goals of care conversations in clinical notes with active learning.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2024Article
- Development of a keyword library for capturing PRO-CTCAE-focused "symptom talk" in oncology conversations.JAMIA open · 2023Article
- Classification of neurologic outcomes from medical notes using natural language processing.Expert systems with applications · 2023Article
- Predictors of Documented Goals-of-Care Discussion for Hospitalized Patients With Chronic Illness.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2023Article
- Improving communication about goals of care for hospitalized patients with serious illness: Study protocol for two complementary randomized trials.Contemporary clinical trials · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextDocumented goals-of-care discussions are an important quality metric for patients with serious illness. Natural language processing (NLP) is a promising approach for identifying goals-of-care discussions in the electronic health record (EHR).
objectivesTo compare three NLP modeling approaches for identifying EHR documentation of goals-of-care discussions and generate hypotheses about differences in performance.
methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods study to evaluate performance and misclassification for three NLP featurization approaches modeled with regularized logistic regression: bag-of-words (BOW), rule-based, and a hybrid approach. From a prospective cohort of 150 patients hospitalized with serious illness over 2018 to 2020, we collected 4391 inpatient EHR notes; 99 (2.3%) contained documented goals-of-care discussions. We used leave-one-out cross-validation to estimate performance by comparing pooled NLP predictions to human abstractors with receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) and precision-recall (PR) analyses. We qualitatively examined a purposive sample of 70 NLP-misclassified notes using content analysis to identify linguistic features that allowed us to generate hypotheses underpinning misclassification.
resultsAll three modeling approaches discriminated between notes with and without goals-of-care discussions (AUC
conclusionNLP holds promise for identifying EHR-documented goals-of-care discussions. However, the rarity of goals-of-care content in EHR data limits performance. Our findings highlight opportunities to optimize NLP modeling approaches, and support further exploration of different NLP approaches to identify goals-of-care discussions.
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.