» Articles » PMID: 26911811

Extracting Information from the Text of Electronic Medical Records to Improve Case Detection: a Systematic Review

Overview
Date 2016 Feb 26
PMID 26911811
Citations 154
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Electronic medical records (EMRs) are revolutionizing health-related research. One key issue for study quality is the accurate identification of patients with the condition of interest. Information in EMRs can be entered as structured codes or unstructured free text. The majority of research studies have used only coded parts of EMRs for case-detection, which may bias findings, miss cases, and reduce study quality. This review examines whether incorporating information from text into case-detection algorithms can improve research quality.

Methods: A systematic search returned 9659 papers, 67 of which reported on the extraction of information from free text of EMRs with the stated purpose of detecting cases of a named clinical condition. Methods for extracting information from text and the technical accuracy of case-detection algorithms were reviewed.

Results: Studies mainly used US hospital-based EMRs, and extracted information from text for 41 conditions using keyword searches, rule-based algorithms, and machine learning methods. There was no clear difference in case-detection algorithm accuracy between rule-based and machine learning methods of extraction. Inclusion of information from text resulted in a significant improvement in algorithm sensitivity and area under the receiver operating characteristic in comparison to codes alone (median sensitivity 78% (codes + text) vs 62% (codes), P = .03; median area under the receiver operating characteristic 95% (codes + text) vs 88% (codes), P = .025).

Conclusions: Text in EMRs is accessible, especially with open source information extraction algorithms, and significantly improves case detection when combined with codes. More harmonization of reporting within EMR studies is needed, particularly standardized reporting of algorithm accuracy metrics like positive predictive value (precision) and sensitivity (recall).

Citing Articles

An empirical study of using radiology reports and images to improve intensive care unit mortality prediction.

Lin M, Wang S, Ding Y, Zhao L, Wang F, Peng Y JAMIA Open. 2025; 8(1):ooae137.

PMID: 39980476 PMC: 11841685. DOI: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooae137.


Classification performance and reproducibility of GPT-4 omni for information extraction from veterinary electronic health records.

Wulcan J, Jacques K, Lee M, Kovacs S, Dausend N, Prince L Front Vet Sci. 2025; 11:1490030.

PMID: 39885843 PMC: 11780673. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1490030.


An Exploration of the Utility and Impacts of Implementation Science Strategies by Cancer Registries for Healthcare Improvement: A Systematic Review.

Stirling R, Melder A, Eyles E, Reich M, Dawkins P Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024; 13:8297.

PMID: 39620520 PMC: 11549572. DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.8297.


A hybrid framework with large language models for rare disease phenotyping.

Wu J, Dong H, Li Z, Wang H, Li R, Patra A BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2024; 24(1):289.

PMID: 39375687 PMC: 11460004. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-024-02698-7.


Machine learning in cancer-associated thrombosis: hype or hope in untangling the clot.

Patell R, Zwicker J, Singh R, Mantha S Bleeding Thromb Vasc Biol. 2024; 3(Suppl 1).

PMID: 39323613 PMC: 11423546. DOI: 10.4081/btvb.2024.123.


References
1.
Friedman C, Shagina L, Lussier Y, Hripcsak G . Automated encoding of clinical documents based on natural language processing. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004; 11(5):392-402. PMC: 516246. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M1552. View

2.
Chapman W, Bridewell W, Hanbury P, Cooper G, Buchanan B . A simple algorithm for identifying negated findings and diseases in discharge summaries. J Biomed Inform. 2002; 34(5):301-10. DOI: 10.1006/jbin.2001.1029. View

3.
Gundlapalli A, South B, Phansalkar S, Kinney A, Shen S, DeLisle S . Application of Natural Language Processing to VA Electronic Health Records to Identify Phenotypic Characteristics for Clinical and Research Purposes. Summit Transl Bioinform. 2011; 2008:36-40. PMC: 3041527. View

4.
Wilke R, Berg R, Peissig P, Kitchner T, Sijercic B, McCarty C . Use of an electronic medical record for the identification of research subjects with diabetes mellitus. Clin Med Res. 2007; 5(1):1-7. PMC: 1855339. DOI: 10.3121/cmr.2007.726. View

5.
Li L, Chase H, Patel C, Friedman C, Weng C . Comparing ICD9-encoded diagnoses and NLP-processed discharge summaries for clinical trials pre-screening: a case study. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2008; :404-8. PMC: 2656007. View