4.6 Article

Extracting medical information from narrative patient records: the case of medication-related information

Journal

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1136/jamia.2010.003962

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Center for Biomedical Computing [U54LM008748]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective While essential for patient care, information related to medication is often written as free text in clinical records and, therefore, difficult to use in computerized systems. This paper describes an approach to automatically extract medication information from clinical records, which was developed to participate in the i2b2 2009 challenge, as well as different strategies to improve the extraction. Design Our approach relies on a semantic lexicon and extraction rules as a two-phase strategy: first, drug names are recognized and, then, the context of these names is explored to extract drug-related information (mode, dosage, etc) according to rules capturing the document structure and the syntax of each kind of information. Different configurations are tested to improve this baseline system along several dimensions, particularly drug name recognition this step being a determining factor to extract drug-related information. Changes were tested at the level of the lexicons and of the extraction rules. Results The initial system participating in i2b2 achieved good results (global F-measure of 77%). Further testing of different configurations substantially improved the system (global F-measure of 81%), performing well for all types of information (eg, 84% for drug names and 88% for modes), except for durations and reasons, which remain problematic. Conclusion This study demonstrates that a simple rule-based system can achieve good performance on the medication extraction task. We also showed that controlled modifications (lexicon filtering and rule refinement) were the improvements that best raised the performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available