4.7 Article

Natural Language Processing for EHR-Based Computational Phenotyping

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TCBB.2018.2849968

关键词

Electronic health records; natural language processing; computational phenotyping; machine learning

资金

  1. NIH [1R21LM012 618-01]
  2. NLM Biomedical Informatics Training Grant [2T15 LM007092-22]
  3. Intel Science and Technology Center for Big Data

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article reviews recent advances in applying natural language processing (NLP) to Electronic Health Records (EHRs) for computational phenotyping. NLP-based computational phenotyping has numerous applications including diagnosis categorization, novel phenotype discovery, clinical trial screening, pharmacogenomics, drug-drug interaction (DDI), and adverse drug event (ADE) detection, as well as genome-wide and phenome-wide association studies. Significant progress has been made in algorithm development and resource construction for computational phenotyping. Among the surveyed methods, well-designed keyword search and rule-based systems often achieve good performance. However, the construction of keyword and rule lists requires significant manual effort, which is difficult to scale. Supervised machine learning models have been favored because they are capable of acquiring both classification patterns and structures from data. Recently, deep learning and unsupervised learning have received growing attention, with the former favored for its performance and the latter for its ability to find novel phenotypes. Integrating heterogeneous data sources have become increasingly important and have shown promise in improving model performance. Often, better performance is achieved by combining multiple modalities of information. Despite these many advances, challenges and opportunities remain for NLP-based computational phenotyping, including better model interpretability and generalizability, and proper characterization of feature relations in clinical narratives.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据