A Hybrid Model for Family History Information Identification and Relation Extraction: Development and Evaluation of an End-to-End Information Extraction System
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Family history information is important to assess the risk of inherited medical conditions. Natural language processing has the potential to extract this information from unstructured free-text notes to improve patient care and decision making. We describe the end-to-end information extraction system the Medical University of South Carolina team developed when participating in the 2019 National Natural Language Processing Clinical Challenge (n2c2)/Open Health Natural Language Processing (OHNLP) shared task. Objective This task involves identifying mentions of family members and observations in electronic health record text notes and recognizing the 2 types of relations (family member-living status relations and family member-observation relations). Our system aims to achieve a high level of performance by integrating heuristics and advanced information extraction methods. Our efforts also include improving the performance of 2 subtasks by exploiting additional labeled data and clinical text-based embedding models. Methods We present a hybrid method that combines machine learning and rule-based approaches. We implemented an end-to-end system with multiple information extraction and attribute classification components. For entity identification, we trained bidirectional long short-term memory deep learning models. These models incorporated static word embeddings and context-dependent embeddings. We created a voting ensemble that combined the predictions of all individual models. For relation extraction, we trained 2 relation extraction models. The first model determined the living status of each family member. The second model identified observations associated with each family member. We implemented online gradient descent models to extract related entity pairs. As part of postchallenge efforts, we used the BioCreative/OHNLP 2018 corpus and trained new models with the union of these 2 datasets. We also pretrained language models using clinical notes from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-III) clinical database. Results The voting ensemble achieved better performance than individual classifiers. In the entity identification task, our top-performing system reached a precision of 78.90% and a recall of 83.84%. Our natural language processing system for entity identification took 3rd place out of 17 teams in the challenge. We ranked 4th out of 9 teams in the relation extraction task. Our system substantially benefited from the combination of the 2 datasets. Compared to our official submission with F1 scores of 81.30% and 64.94% for entity identification and relation extraction, respectively, the revised system yielded significantly better performance (P<.05) with F1 scores of 86.02% and 72.48%, respectively. Conclusions We demonstrated that a hybrid model could be used to successfully extract family history information recorded in unstructured free-text notes. In this study, our approach to entity identification as a sequence labeling problem produced satisfactory results. Our postchallenge efforts significantly improved performance by leveraging additional labeled data and using word vector representations learned from large collections of clinical notes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».