Medical Needs Extraction for Breast Cancer Patients from Question and Answer Services: Natural Language Processing-Based Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A large number of patient narratives are available on various web services. As for web question and answer services, patient questions often relate to medical needs, and we expect these questions to provide clues for a better understanding of patients' medical needs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to extract patients' needs and classify them into thematic categories. Clarifying patient needs is the first step in solving social issues that patients with cancer encounter. METHODS: For this study, we used patient question texts containing the key phrase "breast cancer," available at the Yahoo! Japan question and answer service, Yahoo! Chiebukuro, which contains over 60,000 questions on cancer. First, we converted the question text into a vector representation. Next, the relevance between patient needs and existing cancer needs categories was calculated based on cosine similarity. RESULTS: The proportion of correct classifications in our proposed method was approximately 70%. Considering the results of classifying questions, we found the variation and the number of needs. CONCLUSIONS: We created 3 corpora to classify the problems of patients with cancer. The proposed method was able to classify the problems considering the question text. Moreover, as an application example, the question text that included the side effect signaling of drugs and the unmet needs of cancer patients could be extracted. Revealing these needs is important to fulfill the medical needs of patients with cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".