MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793303269 · doi:10.1109/tcbb.2018.2817488

Automated ICD-9 Coding via A Deep Learning Approach

2018· article· en· W2793303269 on OpenAlexaff
Min Li, Zhihui Fei, Min Zeng, Fang‐Xiang Wu, Yaohang Li, Yi Pan, Jianxin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCentral South UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDeep learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkENCODESupport vector machineMachine learningCoding (social sciences)Artificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Data mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ICD-9 (the Ninth Revision of International Classification of Diseases) is widely used to describe a patient's diagnosis. Accurate automated ICD-9 coding is important because manual coding is expensive, time-consuming, and inefficient. Inspired by the recent successes of deep learning, in this study, we present a deep learning framework called DeepLabeler to automatically assign ICD-9 codes. DeepLabeler combines the convolutional neural network with the 'Document to Vector' technique to extract and encode local and global features. Our proposed DeepLabeler demonstrates its effectiveness by achieving state-of-the-art performance, i.e., 0.335 micro F-measure on MIMIC-II dataset and 0.408 micro F-measure on MIMIC-III dataset. It outperforms classical hierarchy-based SVM and flat-SVM both on these two datasets by at least 14 percent. Furthermore, we analyze the deep neural network structure to discover the vital elements in the success of DeepLabeler. We find that the convolutional neural network is the most effective component in our network and the 'Document to Vector' technique is also necessary for enhancing classification performance since it extracts well-recognized global features. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that the great promise of deep learning techniques in the field of text multi-label classification and automated medical coding.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations145
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and BioinformaticsSame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207