MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404924672 · doi:10.2196/57727

Semiology Extraction and Machine Learning–Based Classification of Electronic Health Records for Patients With Epilepsy: Retrospective Analysis

2024· article· en· W4404924672 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yilin Xia, Mengqiao He, Sijia Basang, Leihao Sha, Zijie Huang, Ling Jin, Yanjie Duan, Yusha Tang, Wanlin Lai, Lei Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceEpilepsyComputer scienceFeature extractionInformation extractionMachine learningRandom forestSemiologyNatural language processingOntologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Obtaining and describing semiology efficiently and classifying seizure types correctly are crucial for the diagnosis and treatment of epilepsy. Nevertheless, there exists an inadequacy in related informatics resources and decision support tools. Objective: We developed a symptom entity extraction tool and an epilepsy semiology ontology (ESO) and used machine learning to achieve an automated binary classification of epilepsy in this study. Methods: Using present history data of electronic health records from the Southwest Epilepsy Center in China, we constructed an ESO and a symptom-entity extraction tool to extract seizure duration, seizure symptoms, and seizure frequency from the unstructured text by combining manual annotation with natural language processing techniques. In addition, we achieved automatic classification of patients in the study cohort with high accuracy based on the extracted seizure feature data using multiple machine learning methods. Results: Data included present history from 10,925 cases between 2010 and 2020. Six annotators labeled a total of 2500 texts to obtain 5844 words of semiology and construct an ESO with 702 terms. Based on the ontology, the extraction tool achieved an accuracy rate of 85% in symptom extraction. Furthermore, we trained a stacking ensemble learning model combining XGBoost and random forest with an F1-score of 75.03%. The random forest model had the highest area under the curve (0.985). Conclusions: This work demonstrated the feasibility of natural language processing-assisted structural extraction of epilepsy medical record texts and downstream tasks, providing open ontology resources for subsequent related work.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207