Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38681755›Full record

ArticleJournal of healthcare informatics research2024

Clinical Information Retrieval: A Literature Review.

Sonish Sivarajkumar, Haneef Ahamed Mohammad, David Oniani, Kirk Roberts, William Hersh, Hongfang Liu, Daqing He, Shyam Visweswaran, Yanshan Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of healthcare informatics research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors.

Sonish SivarajkumarIntelligent Systems Program, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Haneef Ahamed MohammadDepartment of Information Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
David OnianiDepartment of Health Information Management, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Kirk RobertsSchool of Biomedical Informatics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX USA.
William HershDepartment of Medical Informatics & Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR USA.
Hongfang LiuSchool of Biomedical Informatics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX USA.
Daqing HeDepartment of Information Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Shyam VisweswaranIntelligent Systems Program, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Yanshan WangIntelligent Systems Program, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.

Funding

ENACT: Translating Health Informatics Tools to Research and Clinical Decision MakingU24TR004111 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI STEVEN E REIS, SHYAM VISWESWARAN · 2022 to 2026
$23.3M
Semi-structured Information Retrieval in Clinical Text for Cohort IdentificationR01LM011934 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI HERSH, WILLIAM R, LIU, HONGFANG · 2014 to 2025
$5.1M
Closing the loop with an automatic referral population and summarization systemR01LM014306 · NLM · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI Yifan Peng, Justin Frederick Rousseau · 2023 to 2026
$2.7M
NCATS NIH HHS U24 TR004111NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011934NLM NIH HHS R01 LM014306
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical information retrieval (IR) plays a vital role in modern healthcare by facilitating efficient access and analysis of medical literature for clinicians and researchers. This scoping review aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the current state of clinical IR research and identify gaps and potential opportunities for future studies in this field. The main objective was to assess and analyze the existing literature on clinical IR, focusing on the methods, techniques, and tools employed for effective retrieval and analysis of medical information. Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted an extensive search across databases such as Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, and Web of Science, covering publications from January 1, 2010, to January 4, 2023. The rigorous screening process led to the inclusion of 184 papers in our review. Our findings provide a detailed analysis of the clinical IR research landscape, covering aspects like publication trends, data sources, methodologies, evaluation metrics, and applications. The review identifies key research gaps in clinical IR methods such as indexing, ranking, and query expansion, offering insights and opportunities for future studies in clinical IR, thus serving as a guiding framework for upcoming research efforts in this rapidly evolving field. The study also underscores an imperative for innovative research on advanced clinical IR systems capable of fast semantic vector search and adoption of neural IR techniques for effective retrieval of information from unstructured electronic health records (EHRs). Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41666-024-00159-4.

Indexed as

ApplicationsElectronic health recordsInformation retrievalNatural language processingTools

Identifiers

PMID38681755
PMCPMC11052968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.