Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36446133›Full record

Observational studyJMIR public health and surveillance2022

Natural Language Processing for Improved Characterization of COVID-19 Symptoms: Observational Study of 350,000 Patients in a Large Integrated Health Care System.

Deborah E Malden, Sara Y Tartof, Bradley K Ackerson, Vennis Hong, Jacek Skarbinski, Vincent Yau, Lei Qian, Heidi Fischer, Sally F Shaw, Susan Caparosa and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The SMART Text2FHIR Pipeline.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. The SMART Text2FHIR Pipeline.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2023
    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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Deborah E Malden *Epidemic Intelligence Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0567-8294
Sara Y Tartof *Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2336-8476
Bradley K AckersonSouthern California Permanente Medical Group, Harbor City, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0816-7345
Vennis HongDepartment of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6060-8419
Jacek SkarbinskiThe Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1630-5733
Vincent YauGenentech, a Member of the Roche Group, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5301-5300
Lei QianDepartment of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8001-3992
Heidi FischerDepartment of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5343-0002
Sally F ShawDepartment of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6553-1772
Susan CaparosaDepartment of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9625-7705
Fagen XieDepartment of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1565-0490
Kaiser Permanente · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USLa Roche College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNatural language processing (NLP) of unstructured text from electronic medical records (EMR) can improve the characterization of COVID-19 signs and symptoms, but large-scale studies demonstrating the real-world application and validation of NLP for this purpose are limited.

objectiveThe aim of this paper is to assess the contribution of NLP when identifying COVID-19 signs and symptoms from EMR.

methodsThis study was conducted in Kaiser Permanente Southern California, a large integrated health care system using data from all patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 laboratory tests from March 2020 to May 2021. An NLP algorithm was developed to extract free text from EMR on 12 established signs and symptoms of COVID-19, including fever, cough, headache, fatigue, dyspnea, chills, sore throat, myalgia, anosmia, diarrhea, vomiting or nausea, and abdominal pain. The proportion of patients reporting each symptom and the corresponding onset dates were described before and after supplementing structured EMR data with NLP-extracted signs and symptoms. A random sample of 100 chart-reviewed and adjudicated SARS-CoV-2-positive cases were used to validate the algorithm performance.

resultsA total of 359,938 patients (mean age 40.4 [SD 19.2] years; 191,630/359,938, 53% female) with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified over the study period. The most common signs and symptoms identified through NLP-supplemented analyses were cough (220,631/359,938, 61%), fever (185,618/359,938, 52%), myalgia (153,042/359,938, 43%), and headache (144,705/359,938, 40%). The NLP algorithm identified an additional 55,568 (15%) symptomatic cases that were previously defined as asymptomatic using structured data alone. The proportion of additional cases with each selected symptom identified in NLP-supplemented analysis varied across the selected symptoms, from 29% (63,742/220,631) of all records for cough to 64% (38,884/60,865) of all records with nausea or vomiting. Of the 295,305 symptomatic patients, the median time from symptom onset to testing was 3 days using structured data alone, whereas the NLP algorithm identified signs or symptoms approximately 1 day earlier. When validated against chart-reviewed cases, the NLP algorithm successfully identified signs and symptoms with consistently high sensitivity (ranging from 87% to 100%) and specificity (94% to 100%).

conclusionsThese findings demonstrate that NLP can identify and characterize a broad set of COVID-19 signs and symptoms from unstructured EMR data with enhanced detail and timeliness compared with structured data alone.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultCoughFemaleFeverHeadacheHumansMaleMyalgiaNatural Language ProcessingSARS-CoV-2applicationartificial intelligencecoughCOVID-19datadisease characterizationfeverheadachenatural language processingNLPsurveillancesymptoms

Identifiers

PMID36446133
PMCPMC9822566
OpenAlexW4310464163

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.