ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
A NLP-based semi-automatic identification system for delays in follow-up examinations: an Italian case study on clinical referrals.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to propose a semi-automatic method for monitoring the waiting times of follow-up examinations within the National Health System (NHS) in Italy, which is currently not possible to due the absence of the necessary structured information in the official databases.
methodsA Natural Language Processing (NLP) based pipeline has been developed to extract the waiting time information from the text of referrals for follow-up examinations in the Lombardy Region. A manually annotated dataset of 10 000 referrals has been used to develop the pipeline and another manually annotated dataset of 10 000 referrals has been used to test its performance. Subsequently, the pipeline has been used to analyze all 12 million referrals prescribed in 2021 and performed by May 2022 in the Lombardy Region.
resultsThe NLP-based pipeline exhibited high precision (0.999) and recall (0.973) in identifying waiting time information from referrals' texts, with high accuracy in normalization (0.948-0.998). The overall reporting of timing indications in referrals' texts for follow-up examinations was low (2%), showing notable variations across medical disciplines and types of prescribing physicians. Among the referrals reporting waiting times, 16% experienced delays (average delay = 19 days, standard deviation = 34 days), with significant differences observed across medical disciplines and geographical areas.
conclusionsThe use of NLP proved to be a valuable tool for assessing waiting times in follow-up examinations, which are particularly critical for the NHS due to the significant impact of chronic diseases, where follow-up exams are pivotal. Health authorities can exploit this tool to monitor the quality of NHS services and optimize resource allocation.
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.