MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386387286 · doi:10.1186/s40708-023-00203-w

Cerebrovascular disease case identification in inpatient electronic medical record data using natural language processing

2023· article· en· W4386387286 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Informatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Electronic medical recordMedicineMedical recordDiseaseComputer scienceNatural language processingMedical emergencyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Abstracting cerebrovascular disease (CeVD) from inpatient electronic medical records (EMRs) through natural language processing (NLP) is pivotal for automated disease surveillance and improving patient outcomes. Existing methods rely on coders' abstraction, which has time delays and under-coding issues. This study sought to develop an NLP-based method to detect CeVD using EMR clinical notes. METHODS: Clinical Manager (SCM) EMR database records by Personal Health Number (a unique lifetime identifier) and admission date. We trained multiple natural language processing (NLP) predictive models by combining two clinical concept extraction methods and two supervised machine learning (ML) methods: random forest and XGBoost. Using chart review as the reference standard, we compared the model performances with those of the commonly applied International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10-CA) codes, on the metrics of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). RESULT: Of the study sample (n = 3036), the prevalence of CeVD was 11.8% (n = 360); the median patient age was 63; and females accounted for 50.3% (n = 1528) based on chart data. Among 49 extracted clinical documents from the EMR, four document types were identified as the most influential text sources for identifying CeVD disease ("nursing transfer report," "discharge summary," "nursing notes," and "inpatient consultation."). The best performing NLP model was XGBoost, combining the Unified Medical Language System concepts extracted by cTAKES (e.g., top-ranked concepts, "Cerebrovascular accident" and "Transient ischemic attack"), and the term frequency-inverse document frequency vectorizer. Compared with ICD codes, the model achieved higher validity overall, such as sensitivity (25.0% vs 70.0%), specificity (99.3% vs 99.1%), PPV (82.6 vs. 87.8%), and NPV (90.8% vs 97.1%). CONCLUSION: The NLP algorithm developed in this study performed better than the ICD code algorithm in detecting CeVD. The NLP models could result in an automated EMR tool for identifying CeVD cases and be applied for future studies such as surveillance, and longitudinal studies.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.318 · 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