ArticleJMIR medical informatics2023
Understanding Views Around the Creation of a Consented, Donated Databank of Clinical Free Text to Develop and Train Natural Language Processing Models for Research: Focus Group Interviews With Stakeholders.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2023. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInformation stored within electronic health records is often recorded as unstructured text. Special computerized natural language processing (NLP) tools are needed to process this text; however, complex governance arrangements make such data in the National Health Service hard to access, and therefore, it is difficult to use for research in improving NLP methods. The creation of a donated databank of clinical free text could provide an important opportunity for researchers to develop NLP methods and tools and may circumvent delays in accessing the data needed to train the models. However, to date, there has been little or no engagement with stakeholders on the acceptability and design considerations of establishing a free-text databank for this purpose.
objectiveThis study aimed to ascertain stakeholder views around the creation of a consented, donated databank of clinical free text to help create, train, and evaluate NLP for clinical research and to inform the potential next steps for adopting a partner-led approach to establish a national, funded databank of free text for use by the research community.
methodsWeb-based in-depth focus group interviews were conducted with 4 stakeholder groups (patients and members of the public, clinicians, information governance leads and research ethics members, and NLP researchers).
resultsAll stakeholder groups were strongly in favor of the databank and saw great value in creating an environment where NLP tools can be tested and trained to improve their accuracy. Participants highlighted a range of complex issues for consideration as the databank is developed, including communicating the intended purpose, the approach to access and safeguarding the data, who should have access, and how to fund the databank. Participants recommended that a small-scale, gradual approach be adopted to start to gather donations and encouraged further engagement with stakeholders to develop a road map and set of standards for the databank.
conclusionsThese findings provide a clear mandate to begin developing the databank and a framework for stakeholder expectations, which we would aim to meet with the databank delivery.
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.