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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
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 |