Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35308962›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2021

Launching into clinical space with medspaCy: a new clinical text processing toolkit in Python.

Hannah Eyre, Alec B Chapman, Kelly S Peterson, Jianlin Shi, Patrick R Alba, Makoto M Jones, Tamára L Box, Scott L DuVall, Olga V Patterson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Hannah EyreVA Salt Lake City Health Care System.
Alec B ChapmanVA Salt Lake City Health Care System.
Kelly S PetersonUniversity of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Jianlin ShiUniversity of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Patrick R AlbaVA Salt Lake City Health Care System.
Makoto M JonesVA Salt Lake City Health Care System.
Tamára L BoxVeterans Health Administration Office of Analytics and Performance Integration.
Scott L DuVallVA Salt Lake City Health Care System.
Olga V PattersonVA Salt Lake City Health Care System.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite impressive success of machine learning algorithms in clinical natural language processing (cNLP), rule-based approaches still have a prominent role. In this paper, we introduce medspaCy, an extensible, open-source cNLP library based on spaCy framework that allows flexible integration of rule-based and machine learning-based algorithms adapted to clinical text. MedspaCy includes a variety of components that meet common cNLP needs such as context analysis and mapping to standard terminologies. By utilizing spaCy's clear and easy-to-use conventions, medspaCy enables development of custom pipelines that integrate easily with other spaCy-based modules. Our toolkit includes several core components and facilitates rapid development of pipelines for clinical text.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsNatural Language ProcessingHumansMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID35308962
PMCPMC8861690

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.