MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128795341 · doi:10.1109/cbms.2009.5255451

Scenario-oriented information extraction from electronic health records

2009· article· en· W2128795341 on OpenAlexaff
Anis Yousefi, Negin Mastouri, Kamran Sartipi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMatching (statistics)Information retrievalElectronic health recordTask (project management)Set (abstract data type)Health recordsInformation extractionRank (graph theory)Data miningHealth careData scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Providing a comprehensive set of relevant information at the point of care is crucial for making correct clinical decisions in a timely manner. Retrieval of scenario specific information from an extensive electronic health record (EHR) is a tedious, time consuming and error prone task. In this paper, we propose a model and a technique for extracting relevant clinical information with respect to the most probable diagnostic hypotheses in a clinical scenario. In the proposed technique, we first model the relationship between diseases, symptoms, signs and other clinical information as a graph and apply concept lattice analysis to extract all possible diagnostic hypotheses related to a specific scenario. Next, we identify relevant information regarding the extracted hypotheses and search for matching evidences in the patient's EHR. Finally, we rank the extracted information according to their relevancy to the hypotheses. We have assessed the usefulness of our approach in a clinical setting by modeling a challenging clinical problem as a case study.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207