ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026
From annotation to adaptation: extracting temporal relations in French clinical narratives.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extracting temporal information from unstructured clinical narratives is a foundational step toward automated patient timeline generation, a capability that has been proposed as having potential for rare disease diagnosis and care coordination, though prospective clinical validation remains future work. We present a comprehensive framework for temporal relation extraction from French clinical text, addressing a critical gap in non-English clinical NLP resources. We developed specialized annotation guidelines tailored to French medical language and created an annotated corpus of 490 clinical reports from Necker Hospital with 12,464 entity-relation pairs, achieving strong inter-annotator agreement (F1 ≥ 0.94 for core entities). Our comparative evaluation of modern AI approaches-including transformer-based models, large language models, and parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT)-demonstrates that PEFT with CamemBERT-bio-base achieves the strongest temporal relation extraction performance (F1=0.82-0.87 for major relation types), significantly outperforming traditional approaches and matching few-shot large language models with greater computational efficiency. Entity consolidation substantially improves named entity recognition across all methods (DATE F1=0.96). This work provides validated temporal relation extraction methods as a technical foundation for future patient timeline generation systems. We discuss the pathway toward clinical integration, including deployment requirements, governance considerations, and the prospective validation studies needed to confirm clinical utility-particularly for rare genetic disease populations where automated temporal pattern recognition could support earlier diagnosis.
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.