The Impact of Automatic Pre-annotation in Clinical Note Data Element Extraction - the CLEAN Tool
August 11, 2018 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐ arXiv.org
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Tsung-Ting Kuo, Jina Huh, Jihoon Kim, Robert El-Kareh, Siddharth Singh, Stephanie Feudjio Feupe, Vincent Kuri, Gordon Lin, Michele E. Day, Lucila Ohno-Machado, Chun-Nan Hsu
arXiv ID
1808.03806
Category
cs.CL: Computation & Language
Citations
5
Venue
arXiv.org
Last Checked
5 months ago
Abstract
Objective. Annotation is expensive but essential for clinical note review and clinical natural language processing (cNLP). However, the extent to which computer-generated pre-annotation is beneficial to human annotation is still an open question. Our study introduces CLEAN (CLinical note rEview and ANnotation), a pre-annotation-based cNLP annotation system to improve clinical note annotation of data elements, and comprehensively compares CLEAN with the widely-used annotation system Brat Rapid Annotation Tool (BRAT). Materials and Methods. CLEAN includes an ensemble pipeline (CLEAN-EP) with a newly developed annotation tool (CLEAN-AT). A domain expert and a novice user/annotator participated in a comparative usability test by tagging 87 data elements related to Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) and Kawasaki Disease (KD) cohorts in 84 public notes. Results. CLEAN achieved higher note-level F1-score (0.896) over BRAT (0.820), with significant difference in correctness (P-value < 0.001), and the mostly related factor being system/software (P-value < 0.001). No significant difference (P-value 0.188) in annotation time was observed between CLEAN (7.262 minutes/note) and BRAT (8.286 minutes/note). The difference was mostly associated with note length (P-value < 0.001) and system/software (P-value 0.013). The expert reported CLEAN to be useful/satisfactory, while the novice reported slight improvements. Discussion. CLEAN improves the correctness of annotation and increases usefulness/satisfaction with the same level of efficiency. Limitations include untested impact of pre-annotation correctness rate, small sample size, small user size, and restrictedly validated gold standard. Conclusion. CLEAN with pre-annotation can be beneficial for an expert to deal with complex annotation tasks involving numerous and diverse target data elements.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
๐ Similar Papers
In the same crypt โ Computation & Language
๐
๐
Old Age
๐
๐
Old Age
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
๐
๐
Old Age
XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understanding
๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal
Effective Approaches to Attention-based Neural Machine Translation
๐
๐
Old Age
A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inference
๐
๐
Old Age
HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?
Died the same way โ ๐ป Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted