ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2026
CUI-Curate: a GraphRAG-based framework for automated clinical concept curation for NLP applications.
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. 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
backgroundClinical named entity recognition tools commonly map free text to Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) Concept Unique Identifiers (CUIs). For many downstream tasks, however, the clinically meaningful unit is not a single CUI but a concept set comprising related synonyms, subtypes, and associated concepts. Constructing these sets is labour-intensive, inconsistently performed, and poorly supported by existing tools.
methodsWe present CUI-Curate, a graph-based retrieval-augmented-generation (GraphRAG) framework for automated UMLS concept set curation. A UMLS knowledge graph was constructed and embedded for semantic retrieval. Candidate CUIs were retrieved using graph-based expansion and then filtered and classified using large language models (GPT-5 and Qwen3-32B). The framework was evaluated on five lexically heterogeneous clinical concepts against manually curated concept sets and gold-standard concept sets.
resultsCUI-Curate produced substantially larger and more complete concept sets than the manual benchmarks. A single retrieval configuration across concepts achieved high recall of definitive concepts with manageable candidate sets. GPT-5 outperformed manual curation for all concepts and retained at least 95% of definitive gold-standard CUIs, while Qwen3-32B achieved comparable but slightly lower performance. Many missed concepts were not observed in 10,000 MIMIC-III notes. CUI-Curate infrastructure and end-to-end processing were inexpensive and stable across runs.
conclusionsCUI-Curate offers a scalable, reproducible, and cost-efficient approach for generating clinician-reviewable UMLS concept sets tailored to clinical natural language processing and phenotyping applications.
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.