ArticleClinical epidemiology2025
Extracting Cognitive Impairment Assessment Information From Unstructured Notes in Electronic Health Records Using Natural Language Processing Tools: Validation with Clinical Assessment Data.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: We aimed to develop a Natural Language Processing (NLP) algorithm to extract cognitive scores from electronic health records (EHR) data and compare them with cognitive function recorded by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)-mandated clinical assessments in nursing homes and home health visits. Patients and Methods: We identified a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries who had either the Minimum Data Set (MDS) or Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) linked to EHR data from the Research Patient Data Registry (Mass General Brigham, Boston, MA) from 2010 to 2019. We applied an NLP approach to identify the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores from unstructured clinician notes in EHR. Using the NLP-extracted MoCA or MMSE scores from EHR, we compared mean differences of extracted MoCA or MMSE by cognition status determined by MDS (impaired vs intact cognition) and OASIS (severe impairment vs intact cognition) data, respectively. Results: Our study cohort had 7419 patients who had MDS (19.7%) or OASIS (80.3%) assessments, with a mean age of 80 (SD=7) years and 60% female. In EHR, the NLP algorithm extracted cognitive test scores with 97% accuracy (95% CI: 92-99%) for MoCA and 100% accuracy (95% CI: 84-100%) for MMSE. In MDS, the mean difference in extracted MoCA was -5.6 (95% CI: -8.7, -2.4, p=0.0008), and the mean difference in extracted MMSE was -7.9 (95% CI: -12.4, -3.5, p=0.0012). In OASIS, the mean difference in extracted MoCA and extracted MMSE was -4.8 (95% CI: -9.1, -0.6, p=0.0006) and -4.5 (95% CI: -9.5, -0.5, p=0.0182), respectively. Conclusion: We developed an NLP algorithm to accurately extract cognitive scores from unstructured EHR, and these extracted cognitive scores were well correlated with cognition function recorded in CMS-mandated clinical assessments. This could help researchers identify patients with various degrees of cognitive impairment in EHR-based research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.