A flexible framework for deriving assertions from electronic medical records

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 568-573

  Roberts, Kirk ^a   Harabagiu, Sanda M ^a  

^a The University of Texas at Dallas   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; MACHINE LEARNING; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE;

DATA MINING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; HUMANS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; SEMANTICS; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 80053243154     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: 1527974X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000152     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Uzuner O, South B, Shen S, et al. i2b2/VA challenge on concepts, assertions, and relations in clinical text. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011;18:552-6.
2. Collier N, Nazarenko A, Baud R, et al. Recent advances in natural language processing for biomedical applications. Int J Med Inform 2006; 75:413-17.
3. Tanabe L, Wilber WJ. Generation of a large gene/protein lexicon by morphological pattern analysis. J Bioinform Comput Biol 2004;1:611-26.
4. Chen L, Friedman C. Extracting phenotypic information from the literature via natural language processing. Medinfo 2004;11(Pt 2):758-62.
5. Lussier Y, Borlawsky T, Rappaport D, et al. PhenoGO: assigning phenotypic context to gene ontology annotation with natural language processing. Pac Symp Biocomput 2006;11:64-75.
6. Rindflesch TC, Tanabe L, Weinstein JN, et al. EDGAR: extraction of drugs, genes, and relations from the biomedical literature. Pac Symp Biocomput 2000;5:514-25.
7. Hristovski D, Friedman C, Rindflesch TC, et al. Exploiting semantic relations for literature-based discovery. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2006:216-20.
8. Duda S, Aliferis C, Miller R, et al. Extracting drug-drug interaction articles from MEDLINE to improve the content of drug databases. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2005:216-20.
9. Rzhetsky A, Iossifov I, Koike T, et al. GeneWays: a system for extracting, analyzing, visualizing, and integrating molecular pathway data. J Biomed Inform 2004;37:43-53.
10. Heinze DT, Morsch ML, Holbrook J. Mining free-text medical records. Proc AMIA Symp 2001:254-8.
11. Cao H, Hripcsak G, Markatou M. A statistical methodology for analyzing cooccurrence data from a large sample. J Biomed Inform 2007;40:343-52.
12. Friedman C, Hripcsak G, Shagina L, et al. Representing information in patient reports using natural language processing and the extensible markup language. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1999;6:76-87.
13. Friedman C, Shagina L, Lussier Y, et al. Automated encoding of clinical documents based on natural language processing. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004;11:392-402.
14. Friedman C, Alderson PO, Austin JH, et al. A general natural-language text processor for clinical radiology. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1994;1:161-74.
15. Hahn U, Romacker M, Schulz S. Creating knowledge repositories from biomedical reports: the MEDSYNDIKATE text mining system. Pac Symp Biocomput 2002;7:338-49.
16. Babic A. Knowledge discovery for advanced clinical data management and analysis. Stud Health Technol Inform 1999;68:409-13.
17. Hripcsak G, Bakken S, Stetson PD, et al. Mining complex clinical data for patient safety research: a framework for event discovery. J Biomed Inform 2003;36:120-30.
18. Hripcsak G, Austin JH, Alderson PO, et al. Use of natural language processing to translate clinical information from a database of 889,921 chest radiographic reports. Radiology 2002;224:157-63.
19. Lindberg DA, Humphreys BL, McCray AT. The unified medical language system. Methods Inf Med 1993;32:281-91.
20. Zeng Q, Cimino JJ. Automated knowledge extraction from the UMLS. Proc AMIA Symp 1998:568-72.
21. Bard J, Rhee SY, Ashburner M. An ontology for cell types. Genome Biol 2005;6:R21.
22. Smith CL, Goldsmith CA, Eppig JT. The mammalian phenotype ontology as a tool for annotating, analyzing, and comparing phenotypic information. Genome Biol 2005;6:R7.
23. Scheuermann RH, Ceusters W, Smith B. Toward an ontological treatment of disease and diagnosis. Summit on Translat Bioinforma 2009:116-20.
24. Aronson AR. Effective mapping of biomedical text to the UMLS Metathesaurus: the MetaMap program. 2001. http://mmtx.nlm.nih.gov.
25. Tsuruoka T, Tateishi T, Kim JD, et al. Developing a robust part-of-speech tagger for biomedical text. Advances in Informationsd10th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics 2005:382-92 http://bit.ly/geniatagger.
26. Patrick J, Min L. High accuracy information extraction of medication information from clinical notes: 2009 i2b2 medication extraction challenge. J Am Med Infom Assoc 2010;17:524-7.
27. Zhou G, Zhang J, Su J, et al. Recognizing names in biomedical texts: a machine learning approach. Bioinformatics 2004;20:1178-90.
28. Lafferty J, McCallum A, Pereira F. Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) 2001:282-9.
29. Vapnik V. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. Berlin: Springer-Verlang, 1995.
30. Chapman WW, Bridewell W, Hanbury P, et al. A Simple Algorithm for Identifying Negated Findings and Diseases in Discharge Summaries. Biomed Inform 2001;24:310-10.
31. Gindl S. Negation Detection in Automated Medical Applications. Vienna: Vienna University of Technology, 2006.
32. Szarvas G. Hedge classification in biomedical texts with weakly supervised selection of keywords. Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) 2009:281-9.
33. Morante R, Daelemans W. Learning the scope of hedge cues in biomedical texts. Proceedings of the Workshop on BioNLP 2009:28-36.
34. Farkas R, Vencze V, Móra G, et al. The CoNLL-2010 shared task: learning to detect hedges and their scope in natural language text. Proceedings of the Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning: Shared Task 2010:1-12.
35. Pudil P, Novovicová J, Kittler J. Floating search methods in feature selection. Pattern Recognit Lett 1994;15:1119-25.
36. Fellbaum C. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998.
37. Palmer M, Kingsbury P, Gildea D. The proposition bank: an annotated corpus of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics 2005;31:71-106.
38. Stone PJ, Dunphy DC, Smith MS, et al. The general inquirer: a computer approach to content analysis. MIT studies in comparative politics 1966.
39. McCallum AK. MALLET: a machine learning for language toolkit. 2002. http:// mallet.cs.umass.edu.
40. Fan RE, Change KW, Hsieh CJ, et al. LIBLINEAR: a library for large linear classification. J Mach Learn Res 2008;9:1871-4.