Using Primary Care Clinical Text Data and Natural Language Processing to Identify Indicators of COVID-19 in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate whether a rule-based natural language processing (NLP) system, applied to primary care clinical text data, could be used to monitor COVID-19 viral activity in Toronto, Canada. We employed a retrospective cohort design. We included primary care patients with a clinical encounter between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 at one of 44 participating clinical sites. During the study timeframe, Toronto first experienced a COVID-19 outbreak between March-2020 and June-2020; followed by a second viral resurgence from October-2020 through December-2020. We used an expert derived dictionary, pattern matching tools and contextual analyzer to classify primary care documents as 1) COVID-19 positive, 2) COVID-19 negative, or 3) unknown COVID-19 status. We applied the COVID-19 biosurveillance system across three primary care electronic medical record text streams: 1) lab text, 2) health condition diagnosis text and 3) clinical notes. We enumerated COVID-19 entities in the clinical text and estimated the proportion of patients with a positive COVID-19 record. We constructed a primary care COVID-19 NLP-derived time series and investigated its correlation with independent/external public health series: 1) lab confirmed COVID-19 cases, 2) COVID-19 hospitalizations, 3) COVID-19 ICU admissions, and 4) COVID-19 intubations. A total of 196,440 unique patients were observed over the study timeframe, of which 4,580 (2.3%) had at least one positive COVID-19 document in their primary care electronic medical record. Our NLP-derived COVID-19 time series describing the temporal dynamics of COVID-19 positivity status over the study timeframe demonstrated a pattern/trend which strongly mirrored that of other external public health series under investigation. We conclude that primary care text data passively collected from electronic medical record systems represent a high quality, low-cost source of information for monitoring/surveilling COVID-19 impacts on community health.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".