ArticleFrontiers in digital health2023
Acute stroke CDS: automatic retrieval of thrombolysis contraindications from unstructured clinical letters.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diving into the Regulatory Landscape of Digital Therapeutics.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Review
- Automated Identification of Stroke Thrombolysis Contraindications from Synthetic Clinical Notes: A Proof-of-Concept Study.Cerebrovascular diseases extra · 2025Article
- Machine learning for early dynamic prediction of functional outcome after stroke.Communications medicine · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Thrombolysis treatment for acute ischaemic stroke can lead to better outcomes if administered early enough. However, contraindications exist which put the patient at greater risk of a bleed (e.g. recent major surgery, anticoagulant medication). Therefore, clinicians must check a patient's past medical history before proceeding with treatment. In this work we present a machine learning approach for accurate automatic detection of this information in unstructured text documents such as discharge letters or referral letters, to support the clinician in making a decision about whether to administer thrombolysis. Methods: We consulted local and national guidelines for thrombolysis eligibility, identifying 86 entities which are relevant to the thrombolysis decision. A total of 8,067 documents from 2,912 patients were manually annotated with these entities by medical students and clinicians. Using this data, we trained and validated several transformer-based named entity recognition (NER) models, focusing on transformer models which have been pre-trained on a biomedical corpus as these have shown most promise in the biomedical NER literature. Results: Our best model was a PubMedBERT-based approach, which obtained a lenient micro/macro F1 score of 0.829/0.723. Ensembling 5 variants of this model gave a significant boost to precision, obtaining micro/macro F1 of 0.846/0.734 which approaches the human annotator performance of 0.847/0.839. We further propose numeric definitions for the concepts of name regularity (similarity of all spans which refer to an entity) and context regularity (similarity of all context surrounding mentions of an entity), using these to analyse the types of errors made by the system and finding that the name regularity of an entity is a stronger predictor of model performance than raw training set frequency. Discussion: Overall, this work shows the potential of machine learning to provide clinical decision support (CDS) for the time-critical decision of thrombolysis administration in ischaemic stroke by quickly surfacing relevant information, leading to prompt treatment and hence to better patient outcomes.
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.