Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38223407›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2024

Topic modeling on clinical social work notes for exploring social determinants of health factors.

Shenghuan Sun, Travis Zack, Christopher Y K Williams, Madhumita Sushil, Atul J Butte

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Development of a natural language processing algorithm to extract social determinants of health from clinician notes.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shenghuan SunBakar Computational Health Sciences Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4339-2716
Travis ZackBakar Computational Health Sciences Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, United States.
Christopher Y K WilliamsBakar Computational Health Sciences Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, United States.
Madhumita SushilBakar Computational Health Sciences Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7884-0526
Atul J ButteBakar Computational Health Sciences Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7433-2740
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Existing research on social determinants of health (SDoH) predominantly focuses on physician notes and structured data within electronic medical records. This study posits that social work notes are an untapped, potentially rich source for SDoH information. We hypothesize that clinical notes recorded by social workers, whose role is to ameliorate social and economic factors, might provide a complementary information source of data on SDoH compared to physician notes, which primarily concentrate on medical diagnoses and treatments. We aimed to use word frequency analysis and topic modeling to identify prevalent terms and robust topics of discussion within a large cohort of social work notes including both outpatient and in-patient consultations. Materials and methods: We retrieved a diverse, deidentified corpus of 0.95 million clinical social work notes from 181 644 patients at the University of California, San Francisco. We conducted word frequency analysis related to ICD-10 chapters to identify prevalent terms within the notes. We then applied Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modeling analysis to characterize this corpus and identify potential topics of discussion, which was further stratified by note types and disease groups. Results: Word frequency analysis primarily identified medical-related terms associated with specific ICD10 chapters, though it also detected some subtle SDoH terms. In contrast, the LDA topic modeling analysis extracted 11 topics explicitly related to social determinants of health risk factors, such as financial status, abuse history, social support, risk of death, and mental health. The topic modeling approach effectively demonstrated variations between different types of social work notes and across patients with different types of diseases or conditions. Discussion: Our findings highlight LDA topic modeling's effectiveness in extracting SDoH-related themes and capturing variations in social work notes, demonstrating its potential for informing targeted interventions for at-risk populations. Conclusion: Social work notes offer a wealth of unique and valuable information on an individual's SDoH. These notes present consistent and meaningful topics of discussion that can be effectively analyzed and utilized to improve patient care and inform targeted interventions for at-risk populations.

Indexed as

electronic health recordsnatural language processingsocial determinants of healthsocial work notestopic modeling

Identifiers

PMID38223407
PMCPMC10788143
OpenAlexW4390858558

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.