MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402552866 · doi:10.2196/59782

Evaluating Medical Entity Recognition in Health Care: Entity Model Quantitative Study

2024· article· en· W4402552866 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shengyu Liu, Anran Wang, Xiaolei Xiu, Ming Zhong, Sizhu Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintComputer scienceHealth careArtificial intelligenceData scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Named entity recognition (NER) models are essential for extracting structured information from unstructured medical texts by identifying entities such as diseases, treatments, and conditions, enhancing clinical decision-making and research. Innovations in machine learning, particularly those involving Bidirectional Encoder Representations From Transformers (BERT)-based deep learning and large language models, have significantly advanced NER capabilities. However, their performance varies across medical datasets due to the complexity and diversity of medical terminology. Previous studies have often focused on overall performance, neglecting specific challenges in medical contexts and the impact of macrofactors like lexical composition on prediction accuracy. These gaps hinder the development of optimized NER models for medical applications. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to meticulously evaluate the performance of various NER models in the context of medical text analysis, focusing on how complex medical terminology affects entity recognition accuracy. Additionally, we explored the influence of macrofactors on model performance, seeking to provide insights for refining NER models and enhancing their reliability for medical applications. METHODS: This study comprehensively evaluated 7 NER models-hidden Markov models, conditional random fields, BERT for Biomedical Text Mining, Big Transformer Models for Efficient Long-Sequence Attention, Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attention, Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach, and Gemma-across 3 medical datasets: Revised Joint Workshop on Natural Language Processing in Biomedicine and its Applications (JNLPBA), BioCreative V CDR, and Anatomical Entity Mention (AnatEM). The evaluation focused on prediction accuracy, resource use (eg, central processing unit and graphics processing unit use), and the impact of fine-tuning hyperparameters. The macrofactors affecting model performance were also screened using the multilevel factor elimination algorithm. RESULTS: The fine-tuned BERT for Biomedical Text Mining, with balanced resource use, generally achieved the highest prediction accuracy across the Revised JNLPBA and AnatEM datasets, with microaverage (AVG_MICRO) scores of 0.932 and 0.8494, respectively, highlighting its superior proficiency in identifying medical entities. Gemma, fine-tuned using the low-rank adaptation technique, achieved the highest accuracy on the BioCreative V CDR dataset with an AVG_MICRO score of 0.9962 but exhibited variability across the other datasets (AVG_MICRO scores of 0.9088 on the Revised JNLPBA and 0.8029 on AnatEM), indicating a need for further optimization. In addition, our analysis revealed that 2 macrofactors, entity phrase length and the number of entity words in each entity phrase, significantly influenced model performance. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the essential role of NER models in medical informatics, emphasizing the imperative for model optimization via precise data targeting and fine-tuning. The insights from this study will notably improve clinical decision-making and facilitate the creation of more sophisticated and effective medical NER models.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207