ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2022
Clinical utility of automatic phenotype annotation in unstructured clinical notes: intensive care unit use.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lightweight transformers for clinical natural language processing.Natural language engineering · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveClinical notes contain information that has not been documented elsewhere, including responses to treatment and clinical findings, which are crucial for predicting key outcomes in patients in acute care. In this study, we propose the automatic annotation of phenotypes from clinical notes as a method to capture essential information to predict outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU). This information is complementary to typically used vital signs and laboratory test results.
methodsIn this study, we developed a novel phenotype annotation model to extract the phenotypical features of patients, which were then used as input features of predictive models to predict ICU patient outcomes. We demonstrated and validated this approach by conducting experiments on three ICU prediction tasks, including in-hospital mortality, physiological decompensation and length of stay (LOS) for over 24 000 patients using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-III) dataset.
resultsThe predictive models incorporating phenotypical information achieved 0.845 (area under the curve-receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC)) for in-hospital mortality, 0.839 (AUC-ROC) for physiological decompensation and 0.430 (kappa) for LOS, all of which consistently outperformed the baseline models using only vital signs and laboratory test results. Moreover, we conducted a thorough interpretability study showing that phenotypes provide valuable insights at both the patient and cohort levels.
conclusionThe proposed approach demonstrates that phenotypical information complements traditionally used vital signs and laboratory test results and significantly improves the accuracy of outcome prediction in the ICU.
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.