Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39778706›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2025

A Transformer-Based Pipeline for German Clinical Document De-Identification.

Kamyar Arzideh, Giulia Baldini, Philipp Winnekens, Christoph M Friedrich, Felix Nensa, Ahmad Idrissi-Yaghir, René Hosch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2025. 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. 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

7 authors.

Kamyar ArzidehCentral IT Department, Data Integration Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Giulia BaldiniInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Philipp WinnekensCentral IT Department, Data Integration Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Christoph M FriedrichDepartment of Computer Science, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany.
Felix NensaInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Ahmad Idrissi-YaghirDepartment of Computer Science, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany.
René HoschInstitute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.

Funding

Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt 01ZZ2314D
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCommercially available large language models such as Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) cannot be applied to real patient data for data protection reasons. At the same time, de-identification of clinical unstructured data is a tedious and time-consuming task when done manually. Since transformer models can efficiently process and analyze large amounts of text data, our study aims to explore the impact of a large training dataset on the performance of this task.

methodsWe utilized a substantial dataset of 10,240 German hospital documents from 1,130 patients, created as part of the investigating hospital's routine documentation, as training data. Our approach involved fine-tuning and training an ensemble of two transformer-based language models simultaneously to identify sensitive data within our documents. Annotation Guidelines with specific annotation categories and types were created for annotator training.

resultsPerformance evaluation on a test dataset of 100 manually annotated documents revealed that our fine-tuned German ELECTRA (gELECTRA) model achieved an F1 macro average score of 0.95, surpassing human annotators who scored 0.93.

conclusionWe trained and evaluated transformer models to detect sensitive information in German real-world pathology reports and progress notes. By defining an annotation scheme tailored to the documents of the investigating hospital and creating annotation guidelines for staff training, a further experimental study was conducted to compare the models with humans. These results showed that the best-performing model achieved better overall results than two experienced annotators who manually labeled 100 clinical documents.

Indexed as

DocumentationElectronic Health RecordsGermanyHumans

Identifiers

PMID39778706
PMCPMC11710903

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.