Clinical Application of Detecting COVID-19 Risks: A Natural Language Processing Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The clinical application of detecting COVID-19 factors is a challenging task. The existing named entity recognition models are usually trained on a limited set of named entities. Besides clinical, the non-clinical factors, such as social determinant of health (SDoH), are also important to study the infectious disease. In this paper, we propose a generalizable machine learning approach that improves on previous efforts by recognizing a large number of clinical risk factors and SDoH. The novelty of the proposed method lies in the subtle combination of a number of deep neural networks, including the BiLSTM-CNN-CRF method and a transformer-based embedding layer. Experimental results on a cohort of COVID-19 data prepared from PubMed articles show the superiority of the proposed approach. When compared to other methods, the proposed approach achieves a performance gain of about 1-5% in terms of macro- and micro-average F1 scores. Clinical practitioners and researchers can use this approach to obtain accurate information regarding clinical risks and SDoH factors, and use this pipeline as a tool to end the pandemic or to prepare for future pandemics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".