Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39732668›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024

The aluminum standard: using generative Artificial Intelligence tools to synthesize and annotate non-structured patient data.

Juan G Diaz Ochoa, Faizan E Mustafa, Felix Weil, Yi Wang, Kudret Kama, Markus Knott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Juan G Diaz OchoaQuiBiQ GmbH, Heßbrühlstr. 11, Stuttgart, D-70565, Germany. Juan.diaz@permediq.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9893-4068
Faizan E MustafaQuiBiQ GmbH, Heßbrühlstr. 11, Stuttgart, D-70565, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1004-7545
Felix WeilQuiBiQ GmbH, Heßbrühlstr. 11, Stuttgart, D-70565, Germany.
Yi WangAnalytic Computing Department, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Universitätsstraße 32, Stuttgart, D-70569, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6086-807X
Kudret KamaKlinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart Cancer Center - Tumorzentrum Eva Mayr-Stihl DE, Kriegsbergstraße 60, Stuttgart, D-70174, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0175-9823
Markus KnottKlinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart Cancer Center - Tumorzentrum Eva Mayr-Stihl DE, Kriegsbergstraße 60, Stuttgart, D-70174, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9147-3203

Funding

Ministry for Economics, Labor and Tourism from Baden-Württemberg, Germany BW1_1456 (AI4MedCode)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical narratives are fundamental to the correct identification of a patient's health condition. This is not only because it describes the patient's situation. It also contains relevant information about the patient's context and health state evolution. Narratives are usually vague and cannot be categorized easily. On the other hand, once the patient's situation is correctly identified based on a narrative, it is then possible to map the patient's situation into precise classification schemas and ontologies that are machine-readable. To this end, language models can be trained to read and extract elements from these narratives. However, the main problem is the lack of data for model identification and model training in languages other than English. First, gold standard annotations are usually not available due to the high level of data protection for patient data. Second, gold standard annotations (if available) are difficult to access. Alternative available data, like MIMIC (Sci Data 3:1, 2016) is written in English and for specific patient conditions like intensive care. Thus, when model training is required for other types of patients, like oncology (and not intensive care), this could lead to bias. To facilitate clinical narrative model training, a method for creating high-quality synthetic narratives is needed.

methodWe devised workflows based on generative AI methods to synthesize narratives in the German language to avoid the disclosure of patient's health data. Since we required highly realistic narratives, we generated prompts, written with high-quality medical terminology, asking for clinical narratives containing both a main and co-disease. The frequency of distribution of both the main and co-disease was extracted from the hospital's structured data, such that the synthetic narratives reflect the disease distribution among the patient's cohort. In order to validate the quality of the synthetic narratives, we annotated them to train a Named Entity Recognition (NER) algorithm. According to our assumptions, the validation of this system implies that the synthesized data used for its training are of acceptable quality.

resultWe report precision, recall and F1 score for the NER model while also considering metrics that take into account both exact and partial entity matches. Trained models are cautious, with a precision up to 0.8 for Entity Type match metric and a F1 score of 0.3.

conclusionDespite its inherent limitations, this technology has the potential to allow data interoperability by using encoded diseases across languages and regions without compromising data safety. Additionally, it facilitates the synthesis of unstructured patient data. In this way, the identification and training of models can be accelerated. We believe that this method may be able to generate discharge letters for any combination of main and co-diseases, which will significantly reduce the amount of time spent writing these letters by healthcare professionals.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceHumansNarrationNatural Language ProcessingGenerative AILanguage modelsNon-english Language modelsSynthetic dataSynthetic narratives

Identifiers

PMID39732668
PMCPMC11681671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.