ArticleJMIR formative research2025
Automated Data Harmonization in Clinical Research: Natural Language Processing Approach.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Design and Conduct of Cohort Studies of Peoples With CKD - International Perspectives From iNET-CKD.Kidney international reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Large-scale manual curation and harmonization of metadata from metagenomic and cancer genomic repositories: challenges and solutions.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2026Article
- Comparison of FINDRISC and the Framingham Model for Predicting CHD Risk: Results from the Kharameh Cohort Study.Vascular health and risk management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Integrating data is essential for advancing clinical and epidemiological research. However, because datasets often describe variables (eg, demographic and health conditions) in diverse ways, the process of integrating and harmonizing variables from research studies remains a major bottleneck. Objective: The objective was to assess a natural language processing-based method to automate variable harmonization to achieve a scalable approach to integration of multiple datasets. Methods: We developed a fully connected neural network (FCN) method, enhanced with contrastive learning, using domain-specific embeddings from the Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers for Biomedical Text Mining language representation model, using 3 cardiovascular datasets: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study, the Framingham Heart Study, and the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. We used metadata variable descriptions and curated harmonized concepts as ground truth. We framed the problem as a paired sentence classification task. The accuracy of this method was compared with a logistic regression baseline method. To assess the generalizability of the trained models, we also evaluated their performance by separating the 3 datasets when preparing the training and validation sets. Results: The newly developed FCN achieved a top-5 accuracy of 98.95% (95% CI 98.31%-99.47%) and an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) of 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-0.99), outperforming the standard logistic regression model, which exhibited a top-5 accuracy of 22.23% (95% CI 19.91%-24.87%) and an AUC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.81-0.83). The contrastive learning enhancement also outperformed the logistic regression model, although slightly below the base FCN model, exhibiting a top-5 accuracy of 89.88% (95% CI 87.88%-91.68%) and an AUC of 0.98 (95% CI 0.97-0.98). Conclusions: This novel approach provides a scalable solution for harmonizing metadata across large-scale cohort studies. The proposed method significantly enhances the performance over the baseline method by using learned representations to categorize harmonized concepts more accurately for cohorts in cardiovascular disease and stroke.
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.