Back

Using the natural language processing system MedNER-J to analyze pharmaceutical care records

Ohno, Y.; Kato, R.; Ishikawa, H.; Nishiyama, T.; Isawa, M.; Mochizuki, M.; Aramaki, E.; Aomori, T.

2023-10-02 health systems and quality improvement
10.1101/2023.09.28.23295887 medRxiv
Show abstract

Large language models have propelled recent advances in artificial intelligence technology, facilitating the extraction of medical information from unstructured data such as medical records. Although named entity recognition (NER) is used to extract data from physicians records, it has yet to be widely applied to pharmaceutical care records. In this report, we investigated the feasibility of automatic extraction of patients diseases and symptoms from pharmaceutical care records. The verification was performed using MedNER-J, a Japanese disease-extraction system designed for physicians records. MedNER-J was applied to subjective, objective, assessment, and plan data from the care records of 49 patients who received cefazolin sodium injection at Keio University Hospital between April 2018 and March 2019. The performance of MedNER-J was evaluated in terms of precision, recall, and F-measure. The F-measure of NER for subjective, objective, assessment, and plan data was 0.46, 0.70, 0.76, and 0.35, respectively. In NER and positive-negative classification, the F-measure was 0.28, 0.39, 0.64, and 0.077, respectively. The F-measure of NER for objective and assessment data (F=0.70, 0.76) was higher than that for subjective and plan data, which supported the superiority of NER performance for objective and assessment data. This might be because objective and assessment data contained many technical terms, similar to the training data for MedNER-J. Meanwhile, the F-measure of NER and positive-negative classification was high for assessment data alone (F=0.64), which was attributed to the similarity of its description format and contents to those of the training data. MedNER-J successfully read pharmaceutical care records and showed the best performance for assessment data. However, challenges remain in analyzing records other than assessment data. Therefore, it will be necessary to reinforce the training data for subjective data in order to apply the system to pharmaceutical care records.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.9%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 10%
17.7%
3
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.5%
50% of probability mass above
4
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.4%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 17%
6.4%
6
Briefings in Bioinformatics
326 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
7
Journal of Personalized Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
8
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.8%
9
Bioengineering
24 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
10
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
11
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
12
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 21%
1.2%
13
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
16 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
14
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
15
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
16
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
17
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
18
BMC Medical Education
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
19
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
34 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
BioMed Research International
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
21
Journal of Infection and Public Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
22
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
23
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
24
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
25
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
26
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
27
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
171 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
28
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%