Cargando…

Comparison of MetaMap and cTAKES for entity extraction in clinical notes

BACKGROUND: Clinical notes such as discharge summaries have a semi- or unstructured format. These documents contain information about diseases, treatments, drugs, etc. Extracting meaningful information from them becomes challenging due to their narrative format. In this context, we aimed to compare...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reátegui, Ruth, Ratté, Sylvie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6157281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30255810
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-018-0654-2
_version_ 1783358247999111168
author Reátegui, Ruth
Ratté, Sylvie
author_facet Reátegui, Ruth
Ratté, Sylvie
author_sort Reátegui, Ruth
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical notes such as discharge summaries have a semi- or unstructured format. These documents contain information about diseases, treatments, drugs, etc. Extracting meaningful information from them becomes challenging due to their narrative format. In this context, we aimed to compare the automatic extraction capacity of medical entities using two tools: MetaMap and cTAKES. METHODS: We worked with i2b2 (Informatics for Integrating Biology to the Bedside) Obesity Challenge data. Two experiments were constructed. In the first one, only one UMLS concept related with the diseases annotated was extracted. In the second, some UMLS concepts were aggregated. RESULTS: Results were evaluated with manually annotated medical entities. With the aggregation process the result shows a better improvement. MetaMap had an average of 0.88 in recall, 0.89 in precision, and 0.88 in F-score. With cTAKES, the average of recall, precision and F-score were 0.91, 0.89, and 0.89, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The aggregation of concepts (with similar and different semantic types) was shown to be a good strategy for improving the extraction of medical entities, and automatic aggregation could be considered in future works.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6157281
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61572812018-10-01 Comparison of MetaMap and cTAKES for entity extraction in clinical notes Reátegui, Ruth Ratté, Sylvie BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research BACKGROUND: Clinical notes such as discharge summaries have a semi- or unstructured format. These documents contain information about diseases, treatments, drugs, etc. Extracting meaningful information from them becomes challenging due to their narrative format. In this context, we aimed to compare the automatic extraction capacity of medical entities using two tools: MetaMap and cTAKES. METHODS: We worked with i2b2 (Informatics for Integrating Biology to the Bedside) Obesity Challenge data. Two experiments were constructed. In the first one, only one UMLS concept related with the diseases annotated was extracted. In the second, some UMLS concepts were aggregated. RESULTS: Results were evaluated with manually annotated medical entities. With the aggregation process the result shows a better improvement. MetaMap had an average of 0.88 in recall, 0.89 in precision, and 0.88 in F-score. With cTAKES, the average of recall, precision and F-score were 0.91, 0.89, and 0.89, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The aggregation of concepts (with similar and different semantic types) was shown to be a good strategy for improving the extraction of medical entities, and automatic aggregation could be considered in future works. BioMed Central 2018-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6157281/ /pubmed/30255810 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-018-0654-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Reátegui, Ruth
Ratté, Sylvie
Comparison of MetaMap and cTAKES for entity extraction in clinical notes
title Comparison of MetaMap and cTAKES for entity extraction in clinical notes
title_full Comparison of MetaMap and cTAKES for entity extraction in clinical notes
title_fullStr Comparison of MetaMap and cTAKES for entity extraction in clinical notes
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of MetaMap and cTAKES for entity extraction in clinical notes
title_short Comparison of MetaMap and cTAKES for entity extraction in clinical notes
title_sort comparison of metamap and ctakes for entity extraction in clinical notes
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6157281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30255810
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-018-0654-2
work_keys_str_mv AT reateguiruth comparisonofmetamapandctakesforentityextractioninclinicalnotes
AT rattesylvie comparisonofmetamapandctakesforentityextractioninclinicalnotes