Cargando…

PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature

BACKGROUND: Natural language processing could assist multiple tasks in systematic reviews to reduce workflow, including the extraction of PICO elements such as study populations, interventions, comparators and outcomes. The PICO framework provides a basis for the retrieval and selection for inclusio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Qianying, Liao, Jing, Lapata, Mirella, Macleod, Malcolm
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9524079/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36180888
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02074-4
_version_ 1784800428540559360
author Wang, Qianying
Liao, Jing
Lapata, Mirella
Macleod, Malcolm
author_facet Wang, Qianying
Liao, Jing
Lapata, Mirella
Macleod, Malcolm
author_sort Wang, Qianying
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Natural language processing could assist multiple tasks in systematic reviews to reduce workflow, including the extraction of PICO elements such as study populations, interventions, comparators and outcomes. The PICO framework provides a basis for the retrieval and selection for inclusion of evidence relevant to a specific systematic review question, and automatic approaches to PICO extraction have been developed particularly for reviews of clinical trial findings. Considering the difference between preclinical animal studies and clinical trials, developing separate approaches is necessary. Facilitating preclinical systematic reviews will inform the translation from preclinical to clinical research. METHODS: We randomly selected 400 abstracts from the PubMed Central Open Access database which described in vivo animal research and manually annotated these with PICO phrases for Species, Strain, methods of Induction of disease model, Intervention, Comparator and Outcome. We developed a two-stage workflow for preclinical PICO extraction. Firstly we fine-tuned BERT with different pre-trained modules for PICO sentence classification. Then, after removing the text irrelevant to PICO features, we explored LSTM-, CRF- and BERT-based models for PICO entity recognition. We also explored a self-training approach because of the small training corpus. RESULTS: For PICO sentence classification, BERT models using all pre-trained modules achieved an F1 score of over 80%, and models pre-trained on PubMed abstracts achieved the highest F1 of 85%. For PICO entity recognition, fine-tuning BERT pre-trained on PubMed abstracts achieved an overall F1 of 71% and satisfactory F1 for Species (98%), Strain (70%), Intervention (70%) and Outcome (67%). The score of Induction and Comparator is less satisfactory, but F1 of Comparator can be improved to 50% by applying self-training. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that of the approaches tested, BERT pre-trained on PubMed abstracts is the best for both PICO sentence classification and PICO entity recognition in the preclinical abstracts. Self-training yields better performance for identifying comparators and strains.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9524079
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95240792022-10-01 PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature Wang, Qianying Liao, Jing Lapata, Mirella Macleod, Malcolm Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: Natural language processing could assist multiple tasks in systematic reviews to reduce workflow, including the extraction of PICO elements such as study populations, interventions, comparators and outcomes. The PICO framework provides a basis for the retrieval and selection for inclusion of evidence relevant to a specific systematic review question, and automatic approaches to PICO extraction have been developed particularly for reviews of clinical trial findings. Considering the difference between preclinical animal studies and clinical trials, developing separate approaches is necessary. Facilitating preclinical systematic reviews will inform the translation from preclinical to clinical research. METHODS: We randomly selected 400 abstracts from the PubMed Central Open Access database which described in vivo animal research and manually annotated these with PICO phrases for Species, Strain, methods of Induction of disease model, Intervention, Comparator and Outcome. We developed a two-stage workflow for preclinical PICO extraction. Firstly we fine-tuned BERT with different pre-trained modules for PICO sentence classification. Then, after removing the text irrelevant to PICO features, we explored LSTM-, CRF- and BERT-based models for PICO entity recognition. We also explored a self-training approach because of the small training corpus. RESULTS: For PICO sentence classification, BERT models using all pre-trained modules achieved an F1 score of over 80%, and models pre-trained on PubMed abstracts achieved the highest F1 of 85%. For PICO entity recognition, fine-tuning BERT pre-trained on PubMed abstracts achieved an overall F1 of 71% and satisfactory F1 for Species (98%), Strain (70%), Intervention (70%) and Outcome (67%). The score of Induction and Comparator is less satisfactory, but F1 of Comparator can be improved to 50% by applying self-training. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that of the approaches tested, BERT pre-trained on PubMed abstracts is the best for both PICO sentence classification and PICO entity recognition in the preclinical abstracts. Self-training yields better performance for identifying comparators and strains. BioMed Central 2022-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9524079/ /pubmed/36180888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02074-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Wang, Qianying
Liao, Jing
Lapata, Mirella
Macleod, Malcolm
PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature
title PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature
title_full PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature
title_fullStr PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature
title_full_unstemmed PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature
title_short PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature
title_sort pico entity extraction for preclinical animal literature
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9524079/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36180888
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02074-4
work_keys_str_mv AT wangqianying picoentityextractionforpreclinicalanimalliterature
AT liaojing picoentityextractionforpreclinicalanimalliterature
AT lapatamirella picoentityextractionforpreclinicalanimalliterature
AT macleodmalcolm picoentityextractionforpreclinicalanimalliterature