Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40343216›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Using artificial intelligence to develop a measure of orthopaedic treatment success from clinical notes.

Sarah B Floyd, Ahmed G Almeldien, D Hudson Smith, Benjamin Judkins, Claire E Krohn, Zachary Cole Reynolds, Kyle Jeray, Jihad S Obeid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Sarah B FloydDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, United States.
Ahmed G AlmeldienBiomedical Data Science and Informatics Program, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, United States.
D Hudson SmithDepartment of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, United States.
Benjamin JudkinsDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Prisma Health, Greenville, SC, United States.
Claire E KrohnDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Prisma Health, Greenville, SC, United States.
Zachary Cole ReynoldsDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Prisma Health, Greenville, SC, United States.
Kyle JerayDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Prisma Health, Greenville, SC, United States.
Jihad S ObeidDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: A readily available outcome measure that reflects the success of a patient's treatment is needed to demonstrate the value of orthopaedic interventions. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are survey-based instruments that collect joint-specific and general health perceptions on symptoms, functioning, and health-related quality of life. PROMs are considered the gold standard outcome measure in orthopaedic medicine, but their use is limited in real-world practice due to challenges with technology integration, the pace of clinic workflows, and patient compliance. Clinical notes generated during each encounter patients have with their physician contain rich information on current disease symptoms, rehabilitation progress, and unexpected complications. Artificial intelligence (AI) methods can be used to identify phrases of treatment success or failure captured in clinical notes and discern an indicator of treatment success for orthopaedic patients. Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis of clinical notes from a sample of patients with an acute shoulder injury. The study included adult patients presenting to a Level-1 Trauma Center and regional health system for an acute Proximal Humerus Fracture (PHF) between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2021. We used the progress note from the office visit for PHF-related care (ICD10: S42.2XXX) or shoulder pain (ICD10: M45.2XXX) closest to 1-year after the injury date. Clinical notes were reviewed by an orthopaedic resident and labeled as treatment success or failure. A structured comparative analysis of classifiers including both machine and deep learning algorithms was performed. Results: The final sample included 868 clinical notes from patients treated by 123 physicians across 35 departments within one regional health system. The study sample was stratified into 465 notes labeled as treatment success and 403 labeled as treatment failure. The Bio-ClinicalBERT model had the highest performance of 87% accuracy (AUC = 0.87 ± 0.04) in correctly distinguishing between treatment success and failure notes. Discussion: Our results suggest that text classifiers applied to clinical notes are capable of differentiating patients with successful treatment outcomes with high levels of accuracy. This finding is encouraging, signaling that routinely collected clinical note content may serve as a data source to develop an outcome measure for orthopaedic patients.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceclinical textelectronic health record systemnatural language processingproximal humerus fracturestreatment outcomes

Identifiers

PMID40343216
PMCPMC12058693

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.