Natural Language Processing of Clinical Notes on Chronic Diseases: Systematic Review

Novel approaches that complement and go beyond evidence-based medicine are required in the domain of chronic diseases, given the growing incidence of such conditions on the worldwide population. A promising avenue is the secondary use of electronic health records (EHRs), where patient data are analyzed to conduct clinical and translational research. Methods based on machine learning to process EHRs are resulting in improved understanding of patient clinical trajectories and chronic disease risk prediction, creating a unique opportunity to derive previously unknown clinical insights. However, a wealth of clinical histories remains locked behind clinical narratives in free-form text. Consequently, unlocking the full potential of EHR data is contingent on the development of natural language processing (NLP) methods to automatically transform clinical text into structured clinical data that can guide clinical decisions and potentially delay or prevent disease onset

Clinical text data in machine learning: Systematic review

Background: Clinical narratives represent the main form of communication within healthcare providing a personalized account of patient history and assessments, offering rich information for clinical decision making. Natural language processing (NLP) has repeatedly demonstrated its feasibility to unlock evidence buried in clinical narratives. Machine learning can facilitate rapid development of NLP tools by leveraging large amounts of text data. Objective: The main aim of this study is to provide systematic evidence on the properties of text data used to train machine learning approaches to clinical NLP. We also investigate the types of NLP tasks that have been supported by machine learning and how they can be applied in clinical practice. Methods: Our methodology was based on the guidelines for performing systematic reviews. In August 2018, we used PubMed, a multi-faceted interface, to perform a literature search against MEDLINE. We identified a total of 110 relevant studies and extracted information about the text data used to support machine learning, the NLP tasks supported and their clinical applications. The data properties considered included their size, provenance, collection methods, annotation and any relevant statistics. Results: The vast majority of datasets used to train machine learning models included only hundreds or thousands of documents. Only 10 studies used tens of thousands of documents with a handful of studies utilizing more. Relatively small datasets were utilized for training even when much larger datasets were available. The main reason for such poor data utilization is the annotation bottleneck faced by supervised machine learning algorithms. Active learning was explored to iteratively sample a subset of data for manual annotation as a strategy for minimizing the annotation effort while maximizing predictive performance of the model. Supervised learning was successfully used where clinical codes integrated with free text notes into electronic health records were utilized as class labels. Similarly, distant supervision was used to utilize an existing knowledge base to automatically annotate raw text. Where manual annotation was unavoidable, crowdsourcing was explored, but it remains unsuitable due to sensitive nature of data considered. Beside the small volume, training data were typically sourced from a small number of institutions, thus offering no hard evidence about the transferability of machine learning models. The vast majority of studies focused on the task of text classification. Most commonly, the classification results were used to support phenotyping, prognosis, care improvement, resource management and surveillance. Conclusions: We identified the data annotation bottleneck as one of the key obstacles to machine learning approaches in clinical NLP. Active learning and distant supervision were explored as a way of saving the annotation efforts. Future research in this field would benefit from alternatives such as data augmentation and transfer learning, or unsupervised learning, which does not require data annotation

Phenotyping with Partially Labeled, Partially Observed Data

Identifying a group of individuals that share a common set of characteristics is a conceptually simple task, which is often difficult in practice. Such phenotyping problems emerge in various settings, including the analysis of clinical data. In this setting, phenotyping is often stymied by persistent data quality issues. These include a lack of reliable labels to indicate the presence of absence of characteristics of interest, and significant missingness in observed variables. This dissertation introduces methods for learning phenotypes when the data contain missing values (partially observed) and labels are scarce (partially labeled). Aim 1 utilizes an unsupervised probabilistic graphical model to learn phenotypes from partially observed data. Aim 2 introduces a related semi-supervised probabilistic graphical model for learning phenotypes from partially labeled clinical data. Finally, Aim 3 describes a method for training deep generative models when the training data contain missing values. The algorithm is then applied in a semi-supervised setting where it accounts for partially labeled data as well