Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36287591›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2022

Evaluating the Impact on Clinical Task Efficiency of a Natural Language Processing Algorithm for Searching Medical Documents: Prospective Crossover Study.

Eunsoo H Park, Hannah I Watson, Felicity V Mehendale, Alison Q O'Neil, Clinical Evaluators

Open access · goldAbstract 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 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eunsoo H Park *Edinburgh Medical School, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4664-5587
Hannah I Watson *Canon Medical Research Europe, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4664-5587
Felicity V MehendaleCentre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9716-8162
Alison Q O'NeilCanon Medical Research Europe, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8371-0603
Clinical Evaluatorssee Acknowledgements, United Kingdom, United Kingdom.
Medical Research Scotland · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformation retrieval (IR) from the free text within electronic health records (EHRs) is time consuming and complex. We hypothesize that natural language processing (NLP)-enhanced search functionality for EHRs can make clinical workflows more efficient and reduce cognitive load for clinicians.

objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 3 levels of search functionality (no search, string search, and NLP-enhanced search) in supporting IR for clinical users from the free text of EHR documents in a simulated clinical environment.

methodsA clinical environment was simulated by uploading 3 sets of patient notes into an EHR research software application and presenting these alongside 3 corresponding IR tasks. Tasks contained a mixture of multiple-choice and free-text questions. A prospective crossover study design was used, for which 3 groups of evaluators were recruited, which comprised doctors (n=19) and medical students (n=16). Evaluators performed the 3 tasks using each of the search functionalities in an order in accordance with their randomly assigned group. The speed and accuracy of task completion were measured and analyzed, and user perceptions of NLP-enhanced search were reviewed in a feedback survey.

resultsNLP-enhanced search facilitated more accurate task completion than both string search (5.14%; P=.02) and no search (5.13%; P=.08). NLP-enhanced search and string search facilitated similar task speeds, both showing an increase in speed compared to the no search function, by 11.5% (P=.008) and 16.0% (P=.007) respectively. Overall, 93% of evaluators agreed that NLP-enhanced search would make clinical workflows more efficient than string search, with qualitative feedback reporting that NLP-enhanced search reduced cognitive load.

conclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this study is the largest evaluation to date of different search functionalities for supporting target clinical users in realistic clinical workflows, with a 3-way prospective crossover study design. NLP-enhanced search improved both accuracy and speed of clinical EHR IR tasks compared to browsing clinical notes without search. NLP-enhanced search improved accuracy and reduced the number of searches required for clinical EHR IR tasks compared to direct search term matching.

Indexed as

clinical decision supportclinical informaticselectronic health recordsnatural language processingsemantic search

Identifiers

PMID36287591
PMCPMC9647457
OpenAlexW4307428701

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.