ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2025
Biomedical literature-based clinical phenotype definition discovery using large language models.
Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Electronic health record (EHR) phenotyping is a high-demand task because most phenotypes are not usually readily defined. The objective of this study is to develop an effective text-mining approach that automatically extracts clinical phenotype definitions-related sentences from biomedical literature. Abstract-level and full-text sentence-level classifiers were developed for clinical phenotype discovery from PubMed. We compared the performance of the abstract-level classifier on machine learning algorithms: support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression (LR), naïve Bayes, and decision tree. SVM classifier showed the best performance (F-measure = 98%) in identifying clinical phenotype-relevant abstracts. It predicted 459 406 clinical phenotype-related abstracts. For the full-text sentence-level classifier, we compared the performance of SVM, LR, naïve Bayes, decision trees, convolutional neural networks, Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers for Biomedical Text Mining (BioBERT). BioBERT model was the best performer among the full-text sentence-level classifiers (F-measure = 91%). We used these two optimal classifiers for large-scale screening of the PubMed database, starting with abstract retrieval and followed by predicting clinical phenotype-related sentences from full texts. The large-scale screening predicted over two million clinical phenotype-related sentences. Lastly, we developed a knowledgebase using positively predicted sentences, allowing users to query clinical phenotype-related sentences with a phenotype term of interest. The Clinical Phenotype Knowledgebase (CliPheKB) enables users to search for clinical phenotype terms and retrieve sentences related to a specific clinical phenotype of interest (https://cliphekb.shinyapps.io/phenotype-main/). Building upon prior methods, we developed a text mining pipeline to automatically extract clinical phenotype definition-related sentences from the literature. This high-throughput phenotyping approach is generalizable and scalable, and it is complementary to existing EHR phenotyping methods.
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.