Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35468085›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2022

Using Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning to Preoperatively Predict Lymph Node Metastasis for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With Electronic Medical Records: Development and Validation Study.

Danqing Hu, Shaolei Li, Huanyao Zhang, Nan Wu, Xudong Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Robust vs. Non-robust radiomic features: the quest for optimal machine learning models using phantom and clinical studies.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Danqing Hu *College of Biomedical Engineering and Instrumental Science, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0810-4819
Shaolei Li *Department of Thoracic Surgery II, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1122-9292
Huanyao ZhangCollege of Biomedical Engineering and Instrumental Science, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2034-0355
Nan WuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery II, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3531-1656
Xudong LuCollege of Biomedical Engineering and Instrumental Science, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7658-5250

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLymph node metastasis (LNM) is critical for treatment decision making of patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer, but it is difficult to precisely diagnose preoperatively. Electronic medical records (EMRs) contain a large volume of valuable information about LNM, but some key information is recorded in free text, which hinders its secondary use.

objectiveThis study aims to develop LNM prediction models based on EMRs using natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning algorithms.

methodsWe developed a multiturn question answering NLP model to extract features about the primary tumor and lymph nodes from computed tomography (CT) reports. We then combined these features with other structured clinical characteristics to develop LNM prediction models using machine learning algorithms. We conducted extensive experiments to explore the effectiveness of the predictive models and compared them with size criteria based on CT image findings (the maximum short axis diameter of lymph node >10 mm was regarded as a metastatic node) and clinician's evaluation. Since the NLP model may extract features with mistakes, we also calculated the concordance correlation between the predicted probabilities of models using NLP-extracted features and gold standard features to explore the influence of NLP-driven automatic extraction.

resultsExperimental results show that the random forest models achieved the best performances with 0.792 area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) value and 0.456 average precision (AP) value for pN2 LNM prediction and 0.768 AUC value and 0.524 AP value for pN1&N2 LNM prediction. And all machine learning models outperformed the size criteria and clinician's evaluation. The concordance correlation between the random forest models using NLP-extracted features and gold standard features is 0.950 and improved to 0.984 when the top 5 important NLP-extracted features were replaced with gold standard features.

conclusionsThe LNM models developed can achieve competitive performance using only limited EMR data such as CT reports and tumor markers in comparison with the clinician's evaluation. The multiturn question answering NLP model can extract features effectively to support the development of LNM prediction models, which may facilitate the clinical application of predictive models.

Indexed as

algorithmdecision makingelectronic medical recordsforest modelinglung cancerlymph node metastasis predictionmachine learningnatural language processingnon–small cell lung cancerprediction models

Identifiers

PMID35468085
PMCPMC9086872

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.