Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35351120›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2022

Visualization of medical concepts represented using word embeddings: a scoping review.

Naima Oubenali, Sabrina Messaoud, Alexandre Filiot, Antoine Lamer, Paul Andrey

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Naima OubenaliFaculté Ingénierie et Management de la Santé, Univ. Lille, 59000, Lille, France. naimaoubenali@gmail.com.
Sabrina MessaoudFaculté Ingénierie et Management de la Santé, Univ. Lille, 59000, Lille, France.
Alexandre FiliotINCLUDE: Integration Center of the Lille University Hospital for Data Exploration, CHU Lille, 59000, Lille, France.
Antoine LamerFaculté Ingénierie et Management de la Santé, Univ. Lille, 59000, Lille, France.
Paul AndreyINCLUDE: Integration Center of the Lille University Hospital for Data Exploration, CHU Lille, 59000, Lille, France.
Université de Lille · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnalyzing the unstructured textual data contained in electronic health records (EHRs) has always been a challenging task. Word embedding methods have become an essential foundation for neural network-based approaches in natural language processing (NLP), to learn dense and low-dimensional word representations from large unlabeled corpora that capture the implicit semantics of words. Models like Word2Vec, GloVe or FastText have been broadly applied and reviewed in the bioinformatics and healthcare fields, most often to embed clinical notes or activity and diagnostic codes. Visualization of the learned embeddings has been used in a subset of these works, whether for exploratory or evaluation purposes. However, visualization practices tend to be heterogeneous, and lack overall guidelines.

objectiveThis scoping review aims to describe the methods and strategies used to visualize medical concepts represented using word embedding methods. We aim to understand the objectives of the visualizations and their limits.

methodsThis scoping review summarizes different methods used to visualize word embeddings in healthcare. We followed the methodology proposed by Arksey and O'Malley (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8:19-32, 2005) and by Levac et al. (Implement Sci 5:69, 2010) to better analyze the data and provide a synthesis of the literature on the matter.

resultsWe first obtained 471 unique articles from a search conducted in PubMed, MedRxiv and arXiv databases. 30 of these were effectively reviewed, based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria. 23 articles were excluded in the full review stage, resulting in the analysis of 7 papers that fully correspond to our inclusion criteria. Included papers pursued a variety of objectives and used distinct methods to evaluate their embeddings and to visualize them. Visualization also served heterogeneous purposes, being alternatively used as a way to explore the embeddings, to evaluate them or to merely illustrate properties otherwise formally assessed.

conclusionsVisualization helps to explore embedding results (further dimensionality reduction, synthetic representation). However, it does not exhaust the information conveyed by the embeddings nor constitute a self-sustaining evaluation method of their pertinence.

Indexed as

Natural Language ProcessingSemanticsDatabases, FactualElectronic Health RecordsHumansPubMedData miningDeep learningMedicalNatural language processingVisualizationWord embeddings

Identifiers

PMID35351120
PMCPMC8962592
OpenAlexW4220733785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.