Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39828800›Full record

ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025

Clinical entity augmented retrieval for clinical information extraction.

Ivan Lopez, Akshay Swaminathan, Karthik Vedula, Sanjana Narayanan, Fateme Nateghi Haredasht, Stephen P Ma, April S Liang, Steven Tate, Manoj Maddali, Robert Joseph Gallo and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

12 authors.

Ivan Lopez *Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. ivlopez@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0246-2180
Akshay Swaminathan *Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3426-9289
Karthik VedulaPoolesville High School, Poolesville, MD, USA.
Sanjana NarayananStanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford, CA, USA.
Fateme Nateghi HaredashtStanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford, CA, USA.
Stephen P MaDivision of Hospital Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3738-9569
April S LiangDivision of Clinical Informatics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Steven TateDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
Manoj MaddaliDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford, CA, USA.
Robert Joseph GalloCenter for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Menlo Park, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2601-0173
Nigam H ShahStanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9385-7158
Jonathan H ChenDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4387-8740

Funding

Stanford Center for Clinical & Translational Education and Research (Spectrum)UL1TR003142 · NCATS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI O'HARA, RUTH M · 2019 to 2023
$45.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR003142U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) 1R01AI17812101
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) have improved information extraction over previous methods, yet their reliance on embeddings often leads to inefficient retrieval. We introduce CLinical Entity Augmented Retrieval (CLEAR), a RAG pipeline that retrieves information using entities. We compared CLEAR to embedding RAG and full-note approaches for extracting 18 variables using six LLMs across 20,000 clinical notes. Average F1 scores were 0.90, 0.86, and 0.79; inference times were 4.95, 17.41, and 20.08 s per note; average model queries were 1.68, 4.94, and 4.18 per note; and average input tokens were 1.1k, 3.8k, and 6.1k per note for CLEAR, embedding RAG, and full-note approaches, respectively. In conclusion, CLEAR utilizes clinical entities for information retrieval and achieves >70% reduction in token usage and inference time with improved performance compared to modern methods.

Identifiers

PMID39828800
PMCPMC11743751

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.