ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026
Assessing genetic counseling efficiency with natural language processing.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo build natural language processing (NLP) strategies to characterize measures of genetic counseling (GC) efficiency and classify measures according to phase of GC (pre- or post-genetic testing). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study selected and annotated 800 GC notes from 7 clinical specialties in a large academic medical center for NLP model development and validation. The NLP approaches extracted GC efficiency measures, including direct and indirect time and GC phase. The models were then applied to 24 102 GC notes collected from January 2016 through December 2023.
resultsNLP approaches performed well (F1 scores of 0.95 and 0.90 for direct time in GC and GC phase classification, respectively). Our findings showed median direct time in GC of 50 minutes, with significant differences in direct time distributions observed across clinical specialties, time periods (2016-2019 or 2020-2023), delivery modes (in person or telehealth), and GC phase. DISCUSSION: As referrals to GC increase, there is increasing pressure to improve efficiency. Our NLP strategy was used to generate and summarize real-world evidence of GC time for 7 clinical specialties. These approaches enable future research on the impact of interventions intended to improve GC efficiency.
conclusionThis work demonstrated the practical value of NLP to provide a useful and scalable strategy to generate real world evidence of GC efficiency. Principles presented in this work may also be valuable for health services research in other practice areas.
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.