ArticleBMC research notes2025
Utilizing large language models and natural language processing to classify ischemia status from cardiac stress tests in a large multicenter healthcare system.
Article in BMC research notes, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDocumentation of myocardial ischemia prior to invasive coronary angiography is recommended to minimize patient risk. However, obtaining this information for quality-of-care assessment often requires extracting clinical information from unstructured electronic medical records text. To this end, we sought to evaluate multiple natural language processing (NLP) systems in their ability to classify cardiac stress test reports as documenting ischemia or no ischemia, implementing the one with the best combination of accuracy and feasibility.
resultsFour BERT large language models (LLMs) were fine-tuned, and a rules-based system was designed by training, validating, and testing on an annotated sample of 654 stress test reports from a multisite and multiyear dataset from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The LLM with the highest performance was a ClinicalBERT with precision, recall, and F1 of 86.4%, 100%, and 92.7%, respectively. The rules-based NLP system achieved similar results of 88.1%, 97.4%, and 92.5%, respectively. Stress test reports totaling 1,692,171 and representing 1,096,341 unique patients were classified using the rules-based system after ascertaining current technological limitations, and the system is presently operational for care quality evaluations. Utilizing NLP allows for accurate, high-throughput analysis of cardiac stress test text reports.
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.