Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38954456›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2024

Is Boundary Annotation Necessary? Evaluating Boundary-Free Approaches to Improve Clinical Named Entity Annotation Efficiency: Case Study.

Gabriel Herman Bernardim Andrade, Shuntaro Yada, Eiji Aramaki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. RadAnnotate: Large Language Models for Efficient and Reliable Radiology Report Annotation.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2026
    Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Gabriel Herman Bernardim AndradeGraduate School of Science and Technology, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Ikoma, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1950-8069
Shuntaro YadaGraduate School of Science and Technology, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Ikoma, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6209-1054
Eiji AramakiGraduate School of Science and Technology, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Ikoma, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0201-3609

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNamed entity recognition (NER) is a fundamental task in natural language processing. However, it is typically preceded by named entity annotation, which poses several challenges, especially in the clinical domain. For instance, determining entity boundaries is one of the most common sources of disagreements between annotators due to questions such as whether modifiers or peripheral words should be annotated. If unresolved, these can induce inconsistency in the produced corpora, yet, on the other hand, strict guidelines or adjudication sessions can further prolong an already slow and convoluted process.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to address these challenges by evaluating 2 novel annotation methodologies, lenient span and point annotation, aiming to mitigate the difficulty of precisely determining entity boundaries.

methodsWe evaluate their effects through an annotation case study on a Japanese medical case report data set. We compare annotation time, annotator agreement, and the quality of the produced labeling and assess the impact on the performance of an NER system trained on the annotated corpus.

resultsWe saw significant improvements in the labeling process efficiency, with up to a 25% reduction in overall annotation time and even a 10% improvement in annotator agreement compared to the traditional boundary-strict approach. However, even the best-achieved NER model presented some drop in performance compared to the traditional annotation methodology.

conclusionsOur findings demonstrate a balance between annotation speed and model performance. Although disregarding boundary information affects model performance to some extent, this is counterbalanced by significant reductions in the annotator's workload and notable improvements in the speed of the annotation process. These benefits may prove valuable in various applications, offering an attractive compromise for developers and researchers.

Indexed as

annotationcase reportscase studyclinicalclinical domaindatasetefficiencyentityentity boundariesinformation extractionJapanJapaneselenient annotationmedical case reportmodelmodel performancenamed entity recognitionnatural language processingtext annotation

Identifiers

PMID38954456
PMCPMC11252629

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.