ArticleFrontiers in digital health2023
Inter-rater agreement for the annotation of neurologic signs and symptoms in electronic health records.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Note-Level Phenotyping of Multiple-Sclerosis Notes by a Large Language Model Achieves near Human-Level Agreement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Graph augmented transformers improve chemotherapy toxicity symptom extraction from clinical notes.Nature communications · 2026Article
- End-to-end pipeline for automated heart failure diagnosis with clinical notes using SNOMED-CT.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Adaptive RAG-Assisted MRI Platform (ARAMP) for Brain Metastasis Detection and Reporting: A Retrospective Evaluation Using Post-Contrast T1-Weighted Imaging.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Large Language Model Outperforms Other Computational Approaches to the High-Throughput Phenotyping of Physician Notes.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- Enhanced neurologic concept recognition using a named entity recognition model based on transformers.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The extraction of patient signs and symptoms recorded as free text in electronic health records is critical for precision medicine. Once extracted, signs and symptoms can be made computable by mapping to signs and symptoms in an ontology. Extracting signs and symptoms from free text is tedious and time-consuming. Prior studies have suggested that inter-rater agreement for clinical concept extraction is low. We have examined inter-rater agreement for annotating neurologic concepts in clinical notes from electronic health records. After training on the annotation process, the annotation tool, and the supporting neuro-ontology, three raters annotated 15 clinical notes in three rounds. Inter-rater agreement between the three annotators was high for text span and category label. A machine annotator based on a convolutional neural network had a high level of agreement with the human annotators but one that was lower than human inter-rater agreement. We conclude that high levels of agreement between human annotators are possible with appropriate training and annotation tools. Furthermore, more training examples combined with improvements in neural networks and natural language processing should make machine annotators capable of high throughput automated clinical concept extraction with high levels of agreement with human annotators.
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.