Cargando…

Generation of Silver Standard Concept Annotations from Biomedical Texts with Special Relevance to Phenotypes

Electronic health records and scientific articles possess differing linguistic characteristics that may impact the performance of natural language processing tools developed for one or the other. In this paper, we investigate the performance of four extant concept recognition tools: the clinical Tex...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oellrich, Anika, Collier, Nigel, Smedley, Damian, Groza, Tudor
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4301805/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25607983
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116040
_version_ 1782353692957081600
author Oellrich, Anika
Collier, Nigel
Smedley, Damian
Groza, Tudor
author_facet Oellrich, Anika
Collier, Nigel
Smedley, Damian
Groza, Tudor
author_sort Oellrich, Anika
collection PubMed
description Electronic health records and scientific articles possess differing linguistic characteristics that may impact the performance of natural language processing tools developed for one or the other. In this paper, we investigate the performance of four extant concept recognition tools: the clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System (cTAKES), the National Center for Biomedical Ontology (NCBO) Annotator, the Biomedical Concept Annotation System (BeCAS) and MetaMap. Each of the four concept recognition systems is applied to four different corpora: the i2b2 corpus of clinical documents, a PubMed corpus of Medline abstracts, a clinical trails corpus and the ShARe/CLEF corpus. In addition, we assess the individual system performances with respect to one gold standard annotation set, available for the ShARe/CLEF corpus. Furthermore, we built a silver standard annotation set from the individual systems’ output and assess the quality as well as the contribution of individual systems to the quality of the silver standard. Our results demonstrate that mainly the NCBO annotator and cTAKES contribute to the silver standard corpora (F1-measures in the range of 21% to 74%) and their quality (best F1-measure of 33%), independent from the type of text investigated. While BeCAS and MetaMap can contribute to the precision of silver standard annotations (precision of up to 42%), the F1-measure drops when combined with NCBO Annotator and cTAKES due to a low recall. In conclusion, the performances of individual systems need to be improved independently from the text types, and the leveraging strategies to best take advantage of individual systems’ annotations need to be revised. The textual content of the PubMed corpus, accession numbers for the clinical trials corpus, and assigned annotations of the four concept recognition systems as well as the generated silver standard annotation sets are available from http://purl.org/phenotype/resources. The textual content of the ShARe/CLEF (https://sites.google.com/site/shareclefehealth/data) and i2b2 (https://i2b2.org/NLP/DataSets/) corpora needs to be requested with the individual corpus providers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4301805
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43018052015-01-30 Generation of Silver Standard Concept Annotations from Biomedical Texts with Special Relevance to Phenotypes Oellrich, Anika Collier, Nigel Smedley, Damian Groza, Tudor PLoS One Research Article Electronic health records and scientific articles possess differing linguistic characteristics that may impact the performance of natural language processing tools developed for one or the other. In this paper, we investigate the performance of four extant concept recognition tools: the clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System (cTAKES), the National Center for Biomedical Ontology (NCBO) Annotator, the Biomedical Concept Annotation System (BeCAS) and MetaMap. Each of the four concept recognition systems is applied to four different corpora: the i2b2 corpus of clinical documents, a PubMed corpus of Medline abstracts, a clinical trails corpus and the ShARe/CLEF corpus. In addition, we assess the individual system performances with respect to one gold standard annotation set, available for the ShARe/CLEF corpus. Furthermore, we built a silver standard annotation set from the individual systems’ output and assess the quality as well as the contribution of individual systems to the quality of the silver standard. Our results demonstrate that mainly the NCBO annotator and cTAKES contribute to the silver standard corpora (F1-measures in the range of 21% to 74%) and their quality (best F1-measure of 33%), independent from the type of text investigated. While BeCAS and MetaMap can contribute to the precision of silver standard annotations (precision of up to 42%), the F1-measure drops when combined with NCBO Annotator and cTAKES due to a low recall. In conclusion, the performances of individual systems need to be improved independently from the text types, and the leveraging strategies to best take advantage of individual systems’ annotations need to be revised. The textual content of the PubMed corpus, accession numbers for the clinical trials corpus, and assigned annotations of the four concept recognition systems as well as the generated silver standard annotation sets are available from http://purl.org/phenotype/resources. The textual content of the ShARe/CLEF (https://sites.google.com/site/shareclefehealth/data) and i2b2 (https://i2b2.org/NLP/DataSets/) corpora needs to be requested with the individual corpus providers. Public Library of Science 2015-01-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4301805/ /pubmed/25607983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116040 Text en © 2015 Oellrich et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Oellrich, Anika
Collier, Nigel
Smedley, Damian
Groza, Tudor
Generation of Silver Standard Concept Annotations from Biomedical Texts with Special Relevance to Phenotypes
title Generation of Silver Standard Concept Annotations from Biomedical Texts with Special Relevance to Phenotypes
title_full Generation of Silver Standard Concept Annotations from Biomedical Texts with Special Relevance to Phenotypes
title_fullStr Generation of Silver Standard Concept Annotations from Biomedical Texts with Special Relevance to Phenotypes
title_full_unstemmed Generation of Silver Standard Concept Annotations from Biomedical Texts with Special Relevance to Phenotypes
title_short Generation of Silver Standard Concept Annotations from Biomedical Texts with Special Relevance to Phenotypes
title_sort generation of silver standard concept annotations from biomedical texts with special relevance to phenotypes
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4301805/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25607983
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116040
work_keys_str_mv AT oellrichanika generationofsilverstandardconceptannotationsfrombiomedicaltextswithspecialrelevancetophenotypes
AT colliernigel generationofsilverstandardconceptannotationsfrombiomedicaltextswithspecialrelevancetophenotypes
AT smedleydamian generationofsilverstandardconceptannotationsfrombiomedicaltextswithspecialrelevancetophenotypes
AT grozatudor generationofsilverstandardconceptannotationsfrombiomedicaltextswithspecialrelevancetophenotypes