Textual inference for eligibility criteria resolution in clinical trials

Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Volumn 58, Issue , 2015, Pages S211-S218

  Shivade, Chaitanya ^a   Hebert, Courtney ^b   Lopetegui, Marcelo ^b,c   de Marneffe, Marie Catherine ^b   Fosler Lussier, Eric ^a   Lai, Albert M ^b  

^a Ohio State University   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSIDAD DEL DESARROLLO   (Chile)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Electronic health records; Natural language processing; Textual inference

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; DIAGNOSIS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; RECORDS MANAGEMENT;

AUTOMATED METHODS; CLINICAL NOTES; CLINICAL TRIAL; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD; ELIGIBILITY CRITERION; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; SIMPLE METHOD; TEXTUAL INFERENCE;

MEDICAL APPLICATIONS;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DOCUMENTATION; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MATHEMATICAL PARAMETERS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECOGNIZING TEXTUAL ENTAILMENT; SEMANTICS; TEXTUAL INFERENCE; VALIDATION STUDY; AUTOMATED PATTERN RECOGNITION; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CONTROLLED VOCABULARY; DATA MINING; HUMAN; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT SELECTION; PROCEDURES;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DATA MINING; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION; HUMANS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; PATIENT SELECTION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; VOCABULARY, CONTROLLED;

EID: 84946238936     PISSN: 15320464     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2015.09.008     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Penberthy L., Brown R., Puma F., Dahman B. Automated matching software for clinical trials eligibility: measuring efficiency and flexibility. Contemp. Clin. Trials 2010, 31:207-217. 10.1016/j.cct.2010.03.005.
2. Joseph G., Dohan D. Recruiting minorities where they receive care: institutional barriers to cancer clinical trials recruitment in a safety-net hospital. Contemp. Clin. Trials 2009, 30:552-559. 10.1016/j.cct.2009.06.009.
3. Penberthy L.T., Dahman B.A., Petkov V.I., DeShazo J.P. Effort required in eligibility screening for clinical trials. J. Oncol. Pract. 2012, 8:365-370. 10.1200/JOP.2012.000646.
4. Rosenbloom S.T., Denny J.C., Xu H., Lorenzi N., Stead W.W., Johnson K.B. Data from clinical notes: a perspective on the tension between structure and flexible documentation. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2011, 18:181-186. 10.1136/jamia.2010.00723.
5. Köpcke F., Trinczek B., Majeed R.W., Schreiweis B., Wenk J., Leusch T., et al. Evaluation of data completeness in the electronic health record for the purpose of patient recruitment into clinical trials: a retrospective analysis of element presence. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2013, 13:37. 10.1186/1472-6947-13-37.
6. Demner-Fushman D., Lin J. Answering clinical questions with knowledge-based and statistical techniques. Comput. Linguist. 2007, 33:63-103. 10.1162/coli.2007.33.1.63.
7. Dagan I., Glickman O., Magnini B. The PASCAL recognising textual entailment challenge. Proc. First Int. Conf. Mach. Learn. Challenges Eval. Predict. Uncertain. Vis. Object Classif. Recognizing Textual Entailment 2006, vol. 3944:177-190. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. 10.1007/11736790.
8. MacCartney B., Manning C.D. Natural logic for textual inference. RTE '07 Proc. ACL-PASCAL Work. Textual Entailment Paraphrasing 2007, 193-200. Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg (PA, USA).
9. Grad R.M., Pluye P., Meng Y., Segal B., Tamblyn R. Assessing the impact of clinical information-retrieval technology in a family practice residency. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2005, 11:576-586. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2005.00594.x.
10. Köpcke F., Prokosch H.-U. Employing computers for the recruitment into clinical trials: a comprehensive systematic review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2014, 16:e161. 10.2196/jmir.3446.
11. Stubbs A., Kotfila C., Xu H., Uzuner Ö. Identifying risk factors for heart disease over time: overview of 2014 i2b2/UTHealth shared task Track 2. J. Biomed. Inform. 2015, 58S:S67-S77. 10.1016/j.jbi.2015.07.001.
12. Voorhees E.M., Tice D.M. Building a question answering test collection. Proc. 23rd Annu. Int. ACM SIGIR Conf. Res. Dev. Inf. Retr. - SIGIR '00 2000, 200-207. ACM Press, New York (NY, USA), doi:10.1145/345508.345577.
13. LingPipe 4.1.0 < http://alias-i.com/lingpipe/. >
14. A.R. Aronson, Effective mapping of biomedical text to the UMLS metathesaurus: the MetaMap program, in: Proc. Annu. AMIA Symp., 2001. pp. 17-21.
15. Campeau L. Letter: Grading of angina pectoris. Circulation 1976, 54:522-523.
16. Raghavan P., Fosler-Lussier E., Lai A.M. Inter-annotator reliability of medical events, coreferences and temporal relations in clinical narratives by annotators with varying levels of clinical expertise. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2012, 2012:1366-1374.
17. Fleiss J.L. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol. Bull. 1971, 76:378-382. 10.1037/h0031619.
18. Weng C., Wu X., Luo Z., Boland M.R., Theodoratos D., Johnson S.B. EliXR: an approach to eligibility criteria extraction and representation. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2011, 18(Suppl. 1). i116-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000321.
19. Weng C., Tu S.W., Sim I., Richesson R. Formal representation of eligibility criteria: a literature review. J. Biomed. Inform. 2010, 43:451-467. 10.1016/j.jbi.2009.12.004.
20. Tu S.W., Peleg M., Carini S., Bobak M., Ross J., Rubin D., et al. A practical method for transforming free-text eligibility criteria into computable criteria. J. Biomed. Inform. 2011, 44:239-250. 10.1016/j.jbi.2010.09.007.
21. Voorhees E.M. The TREC Medical Records Track. Proc. Int. Conf. Bioinf. Comput. Biol. Biomed. Inf. - BCB'13 2013, 239-246. ACM Press, New York (NY, USA). 10.1145/2506583.2506624.
22. Ni Y., Kennebeck S., Dexheimer J.W., McAneney C.M., Tang H., Lingren T., et al. Automated clinical trial eligibility prescreening: increasing the efficiency of patient identification for clinical trials in the emergency department. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2014, amiajnl - 2014-002887 - . http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002887.
23. B.L. Cairns, R.D. Nielsen, J.J. Masanz, J.H. Martin, M.S. Palmer, W.H. Ward, et al. The MiPACQ clinical question answering system. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2011;2011:171-180.
24. Cao Y., Liu F., Simpson P., Antieau L., Bennett A., Cimino J.J., et al. AskHERMES: an online question answering system for complex clinical questions. J. Biomed. Inform. 2011, 44:277-288. 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.01.004.
25. McKeown K.R., Elhadad N., Hatzivassiloglou V. Leveraging a common representation for personalized search and summarization in a medical digital library. Proc. 3rd ACM/IEEE-CS Jt. Conf. Digit. Libr. 2003, 159-170. IEEE Computer Society.
26. Patrick J., Li M. An ontology for clinical questions about the contents of patient notes. J. Biomed. Inform. 2012, 45:292-306. 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.11.008.
27. Athenikos S.J., Han H. Biomedical question answering: a survey. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2010, 99:1-24. 10.1016/j.cmpb.2009.10.003.
28. Ross J., Tu S., Carini S., Sim I. Analysis of eligibility criteria complexity in clinical trials. AMIA Summits Trans. Sci. Proc. 2010, 2010:46-50.
29. D. Giampiccolo, H. Trang Dang, B. Magnini, I. Dagan, E. Cabrio, B. Dolan, The fourth PASCAL recognizing textual entailment challenge, Text Anal. Conf. 2008. Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2009.
30. L. Bentivogli, C. Peter, I. Dagan, D. Giampiccolo, The seventh PASCAL recognizing textual entailment challenge, in: Proc. TAC, 2011.
31. L. Bentivogli, I. Dagan, H.T. Dang, D. Giampiccolo, B. Magnini. The Fifth PASCAL Recognizing Textual Entailment Challenge, in: Proc. TAC, 2009.
32. C. Fellbaum, WordNet: an electronic lexical database. Bradford Books, 1998. p. 10.
33. Baker C.F., Fillmore C.J., Lowe J.B. The Berkeley framenet project. Proc. 36th Annu. Meet. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. 1998, vol. 1:86. Association for Computational Linguistics, Morristown (NJ, USA). 10.3115/980845.980860.
34. O. Bodenreider, A. Burgun, Comparing terms, concepts and semantic classes in WordNet and the Unified Medical Language System, in: Proc. NAACL 2001 Work. WordNet other Lex. Resour. Appl. Extensions Cust., Pittsburgh, PA, 2001. pp. 77-82.
35. Dagan I., Roth D., Sammons M. Recognizing Textual Entailment 2013, Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
36. Apache Lucene [accessed 12.08. 14]. http://lucene.apache.org/.
37. B.T. McInnes, T. Pedersen, S.V.S. Pakhomov, UMLS-interface and UMLS-similarity: open source software for measuring paths and semantic similarity, in: Proc. Annu. AMIA Symp., vol. 2009, 2009, pp. 431-435.
38. Pedersen T., Pakhomov S.V.S., Patwardhan S., Chute C.G. Measures of semantic similarity and relatedness in the biomedical domain. J. Biomed. Inform. 2007, 40:288-299. 10.1016/j.jbi.2006.06.004.
39. Rada R., Mili H., Bicknell E., Blettner M. Development and application of a metric on semantic nets. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1989, 19:17-30. 10.1109/21.24528.
40. Wu Z., Palmer M. Verbs semantics and lexical selection. Proc. 32nd Annu. Meet. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. 1994, 133-138. Association for Computational Linguistics, Morristown (NJ, USA). 10.3115/981732.981751.
41. Al-Mubaid H., Nguyen H.A. Measuring semantic similarity between biomedical concepts within multiple ontologies. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C: Appl. Rev. 2009, 39:389-398. 10.1109/TSMCC.2009.2020689.
42. P. Resnik, Using information content to evaluate semantic similarity in a taxonomy, 1995, pp. 448-453.
43. J. Jay, D.W.C. Jiang, Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy, n.d.
44. D. Lin, An Information-Theoretic Definition of Similarity, 1998. pp. 296-304.
45. S. Patwardhan, T. Pedersen, Using WordNet-based context vectors to estimate the semantic relatedness of concepts, in: Proc. EACL, 2006.
46. Dietterich T.G. Approximate statistical tests for comparing supervised classification learning algorithms. Neural Comput. 1998, 10:1895-1923. 10.1162/089976698300017197.
47. Shivade C., Malewadkar P., Fosler-Lussier E., Lai A.M. Comparison of UMLS terminologies to identify risk of heart disease in clinical notes. J. Biomed. Inform. 2015.
48. Wu S.T., Liu H., Li D., Tao C., Musen M.A., Chute C.G., et al. Unified Medical Language System term occurrences in clinical notes: a large-scale corpus analysis. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2012, 19:e149-e156. 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000744.