Mining Clinical Notes for Physical Rehabilitation Exercise Information: Natural Language Processing Algorithm Development and Validation Study
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background The rehabilitation of a patient who had a stroke requires precise, personalized treatment plans. Natural language processing (NLP) offers the potential to extract valuable exercise information from clinical notes, aiding in the development of more effective rehabilitation strategies. Objective This study aims to develop and evaluate a variety of NLP algorithms to extract and categorize physical rehabilitation exercise information from the clinical notes of patients who had a stroke treated at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Methods A cohort of 13,605 patients diagnosed with stroke was identified, and their clinical notes containing rehabilitation therapy notes were retrieved. A comprehensive clinical ontology was created to represent various aspects of physical rehabilitation exercises. State-of-the-art NLP algorithms were then developed and compared, including rule-based, machine learning–based algorithms (support vector machine, logistic regression, gradient boosting, and AdaBoost) and large language model (LLM)–based algorithms (ChatGPT [OpenAI]). The study focused on key performance metrics, particularly F1-scores, to evaluate algorithm effectiveness. Results The analysis was conducted on a data set comprising 23,724 notes with detailed demographic and clinical characteristics. The rule-based NLP algorithm demonstrated superior performance in most areas, particularly in detecting the “Right Side” location with an F1-score of 0.975, outperforming gradient boosting by 0.063. Gradient boosting excelled in “Lower Extremity” location detection (F1-score: 0.978), surpassing rule-based NLP by 0.023. It also showed notable performance in the “Passive Range of Motion” detection with an F1-score of 0.970, a 0.032 improvement over rule-based NLP. The rule-based algorithm efficiently handled “Duration,” “Sets,” and “Reps” with F1-scores up to 0.65. LLM-based NLP, particularly ChatGPT with few-shot prompts, achieved high recall but generally lower precision and F1-scores. However, it notably excelled in “Backward Plane” motion detection, achieving an F1-score of 0.846, surpassing the rule-based algorithm’s 0.720. Conclusions The study successfully developed and evaluated multiple NLP algorithms, revealing the strengths and weaknesses of each in extracting physical rehabilitation exercise information from clinical notes. The detailed ontology and the robust performance of the rule-based and gradient boosting algorithms demonstrate significant potential for enhancing precision rehabilitation. These findings contribute to the ongoing efforts to integrate advanced NLP techniques into health care, moving toward predictive models that can recommend personalized rehabilitation treatments for optimal patient outcomes.
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.
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 | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| 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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 découle