Clinical Natural Language Processing

Download Report

Transcript Clinical Natural Language Processing

Computational Intelligence in
Biomedical and Health Care Informatics
HCA 590 (Topics in Health Sciences)
Rohit Kate
Clinical Natural Language
Processing
1
Reading
Paper: What can natural language processing do for clinical
decision support?
Dina Demner-Fushman, Wendy Chapman, Clement McDonald
Journal of Biomedical Informatics 42 (2009) 760-772
Paper: 2010 i2b2/VA Challenge on Concepts, Assertions, and
Relations in Clinical Text
Uzuner Ö., South B., Shen S., DuVall S.
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
2011;18(5):552-556
Clinical Decision Support
Systems
• A clinical decision support (CDS) system is any
computer program designed to help healthcare
professionals to make clinical decisions or present
them with patient-specific assessments and
recommendations
–
–
–
–
–
–
Suggest diagnosis and medications
Trigger reminders
Flag abnormal values
Alert about drug interactions
Remind the user of overlooked diagnoses
Provide advice based on patient-specific data
CDS Systems and Narrative Text
• Such computer based support is much more
effective if the computer system has access to
electronic medical records (EMRs) and has the
ability to process them
• Major portion of patient records, including
radiology reports, operative notes, discharge
summaries etc. are recorded as narrative text
(dictated, transcribed or directly entered) in a
natural language such as English
• Facts that should activate a CDS system are often
found only in free text
CDS Systems and NLP
• Much of the data that could support CDS is
textual and therefore cannot be leveraged by
a CDS system without natural language
processing (NLP)
• NLP to be used for CDS needs to be:
– Reliable
– High-quality
– Modular and flexible
– Fast
Active and Passive CDS with NLP
• Active: System leverages available information
and pushes patient-specific information to the
user
• Passive: The users themselves seek the support
• Users: Depending upon the application, besides
clinicians users could be patients, researchers,
administrators, students, and coders
• Besides free text in the clinical records, NLP for
CDS could also be processing biomedical
literature, web pages etc.
Active and Passive CDS with NLP
Figure from the paper:
Users
Example of an Idealized NLP-CDS System
• It would monitor EMR for insertions of new data
• When free text is entered for example “Right lower lung
opacity, which could be contusion or pneumonia”, NLP
system will kick in to analyze it
• NLP system will extract information that the disorder could
be “pulmonary contusion” or “pneumonia”, this will go to
the CDS system
• The CDS system will look up decision rules for suspected
pneumonia and retrieve results of blood test and evaluate
white blood cell count
• If the count is high, the system will suggest as a reminder
message (may be in natural language) that the patient is
more likely to have pneumonia than pulmonary contusion
and why
Example of an Idealized NLP-CDS System
• Idealizing further, the NLP system may look up
medical literature and solicit more information
and present natural language summaries
– For example, present summaries of best
approaches to manage both disorders
– May look up medical publications, guidelines,
actionable recommendations available in free text
• This idealized system will have to deal with all
the challenges of clinical NLP
Challenges of Clinical Language
Processing
• Good Performance
– Performance should be good enough to be used for clinical
applications, should not be significantly worse than the medical
experts
– System should have flexibility to trade-off precision and recall
• Recovery of Implicit Information
– NLP system should contain enough medical knowledge to make
appropriate inferences
– “rupture” means “rupture of membranes”
– “patchy opacity” and “focal infiltrate” may indicate
“pneumonia”
Challenges of Clinical Language
Processing
• Interoperability: NLP system should seamlessly
integrate into clinical information systems
– Many different interchange formats (e.g. HL7)
– Different types of reports with different formats, text may
contain tables, structured fields etc.
– Output of NLP system should be mapped to appropriate
controlled vocabulary, e.g. UMLS, SNOMED or ICD
Challenges of Clinical Language
Processing
• Training set availability
– Patient records are confidential and requires approval of
institutional review board (IRB)
– There are methods to de-identify names etc. but
identifying names etc. is not easy
– These issues do not arise when processing literature
• Limited availability in electronic form
– Many clinical documents are still written on paper
– Optical Character Recognition (OCR) is not accurate
especially with physicians’ notes
Challenges of Clinical Language
Processing
• Expressiveness
– More than 200 different expressions for severity
information: faint, mild, borderline, 3rd degree, mild to
moderate etc.
– Complex modifiers: “no improvement in pneumonia” in
text will match a query “improvement in pneumonia”
• A lot of abbreviations which could be ambiguous
– pvc may mean pulmonary vascular congestion in chest Xray report and premature ventricular complexes in
electrocardigram report
Challenges of Clinical Language
Processing
• Compactness of text
– Very compact containing many abbreviations
– Sentence boundaries poorly delineated
Admit 10/23
71 yo woman h/o DM, HTN, Dilated CM/CHF, Afib s/p
embolic event, chronic diarrhae, admitted with SOB.
• Rare events
– Medical errors and adverse events are not
reported frequently, difficult to train a system to
detect them
Shared Tasks in Clinical
Language Processing
• Evaluation
– Difficult to obtain gold-standard data, time-consuming for medical
experts to annotate data
– Evaluation competitions or Shared Tasks are very useful, they help
compare different systems on the same data
• i2b2 shared tasks 2008-2012:
–
–
–
–
–
https://www.i2b2.org/NLP/Obesity/
https://www.i2b2.org/NLP/Medication/
https://www.i2b2.org/NLP/Relations/
https://www.i2b2.org/NLP/Coreference/
https://www.i2b2.org/NLP/TemporalRelations/
• ShARe/CLEF eHealth 2013-2014:
– https://sites.google.com/site/shareclefehealth/
– http://clefehealth2014.dcu.ie/
• SemEval 2014 Task 7- Analysis of Clinical Text:
– http://alt.qcri.org/semeval2014/task7/
• TREC Medical Records task
i2b2 2010: Concepts
• Concepts:
– Medical Problems
– Treatments
– Tests
• System input: raw text of medical records
• System output: A plain text file that contains entries of
the form:
c=“concept text” offset || t=“concept type”
(offset indicates line and token numbers of the document)
For example:
– c=“cancer” 5:8 5:8 || t=“problem”
– c=“chemotherapy” 5:4 5:4 || t=“treatment”
– c=“chest x-ray” 6:12 6:13 || t=“test”
16
i2b2 2010: Assertions
• Assertions (attributes of medical problems):
–
–
–
–
–
–
Present
Absent
Possible
Conditional
Hypothetical
Not associated with the patient
• System input: raw text of medical records and given concepts
• System output: Assertions on all problem concepts (and only
problem concepts)
c=“concept text” offset || t=“concept type” || a=“assertion value”
For example:
– c=“hypertension” 5:4 5:4 || t=“problem” || a=“absent”
– c=“diabetes” 6:12 6:12 || t=“problem” || a=“possible”
17
i2b2 2010: Relations
• Extract the relations that exist between the concepts:
– medical problems and treatments
• 6 possible relations
– medical problems and tests
• 3 possible relations
– medical problems and other medical problems
• 2 possible relations
• System input: raw text medical records with given concepts and assertions
(optional)
• System output: relations of pairs of concepts in the following format:
– c="a cardiac catheterization" 9:12 9:14 || r="TeCP" || c="chest pain" 9:5 9:6
– c="a cardiac catheterization" 9:12 9:14 || r="TeRP" || c="an occluded right
coronary artery" 9:23 9:27
– c="a cardiac catheterization" 9:12 9:14 || r="TeRP" || c="a 40-50% proximal
stenosis" 9:29 9:32
18
i2b2 2010: Data
• 349 Training reports
–
–
–
–
97 discharge summaries from Partners
73 discharge summaries from Beth-Israel Deaconess Medical Center
98 Discharge summaries from University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
81 progress notes from University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
• 477 Test reports
– 133 discharge summaries from Partners
– 123 discharge summaries from Beth-Israel Deaconess Medical Center
– 102 Discharge summaries from University of Pittsburgh Medical
Center
– 119 progress notes from University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
19
i2b2 2010: Best Results
• Total 41 teams participated (22 for concepts,
21 for assertions and 16 for relations)
Best F-measures (harmonic mean of precision &
recall):
• Concepts: 85% F-measure
• Assertions: 92.6% F-measure
• Relations: 73.7% F-measure
20