ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2022
Extraction of Treatment Information From Electronic Health Records and Evaluation of Testosterone Recovery in Patients With Prostate Cancer.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence Applications for Automated Data Extraction and Secondary Use of Clinical Information in Uro-oncology: A Systematic Review.European urology open science · 2026Review
- Social media use and the relationship with colorectal cancer screening among foreign-born populations in the United States.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeData quality and standardization remain a challenge when analyzing real-world clinical data. We built a clinical research database, using machine learning and natural learning processing, and investigated factors influencing testosterone recovery (T-recovery) in patients with localized prostate cancer (LPC) after initial androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).
methodsMedication and treatment-associated dates missing in structured tables were extracted from patient notes using ConceptMapper, an automated data extraction tool, standardized and curated in Sema4 clinical research database. ADT usage duration was evaluated, and T-recovery in patients with LPC was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. We assessed the prognostic value of post-ADT T-recovery with prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival and failure-free survival.
resultsIn total, 4,125 of 30,832 (13.4%) patients with prostate cancer had medication exclusively from notes with high precision and recall, F1 score ≥ 0.95. Association of dates with medication usage had a F1 score of 0.76. ADT duration estimation had higher accuracy combining information from notes to tables from electronic medical record (70%
conclusionWe augmented structured electronic medical record data with data extracted from notes and improved the accuracy of medication information for patients. ADT exposure and T-recovery in patients with LPC produced results consistent with the literature and clinical experience and illustrates the power of applying machine learning methods to enhance the quality of real-world evidence in answering clinically relevant questions.
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.