The use of natural language processing on narrative medication schedules to compute average weekly dose

The use of narrative electronic prescribing instructions in pharmacoepidemiology: A scoping review for the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology

Narrative electronic prescribing instructions (NEPIs) are text that convey information on the administration or co‐administration of a drug as directed by a prescriber. For researchers, NEPIs have the potential to advance our understanding of the risks and benefits of medications in populations; however, due to their unstructured nature, they are not often utilized. The goal of this scoping review was to evaluate how NEPIs are currently employed in research, identify opportunities and challenges for their broader application, and provide recommendations on their future use. The scoping review comprised a comprehensive literature review and a survey of key stakeholders. From the literature review, we identified 33 primary articles that described the use of NEPIs. The majority of articles (n = 19) identified issues with the quality of information in NEPIs compared with structured prescribing information; nine articles described the development of novel algorithms that performed well in extracting information from NEPIs, and five described the used of manual or simpler algorithms to extract prescribing information from NEPIs. A survey of 19 stakeholders indicated concerns for the quality of information in NEPIs and called for standardization of NEPIs to reduce data variability/errors. Nevertheless, stakeholders believed NEPIs present an opportunity to identify prescriber's intent for the prescription and to study temporal treatment patterns. In summary, NEPIs hold much promise for advancing the field of pharmacoepidemiology. Researchers should take advantage of addressing important questions that can be uniquely answered with NEPIs, but exercise caution when using this information and carefully consider the quality of the data.

Angina Severity, Mortality, and Healthcare Utilization Among Veterans With Stable Angina

Background

Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) angina severity classification is associated with mortality, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularization in clinical trial and registry data. The objective of this study was to determine associations between CCS class and all‐cause mortality and healthcare utilization, using natural language processing to extract CCS classifications from clinical notes.

Methods and Results

In this retrospective cohort study of veterans in the United States with stable angina from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2013, natural language processing extracted CCS classifications. Veterans with a prior diagnosis of coronary artery disease were excluded. Outcomes included all‐cause mortality (primary), all‐cause and cardiovascular‐specific hospitalizations, coronary revascularization, and 1‐year healthcare costs. Of 299 577 veterans identified, 14 216 (4.7%) had ≥1 CCS classification extracted by natural language processing. The mean age was 66.6±9.8 years, 99% of participants were male, and 81% were white. During a median follow‐up of 3.4 years, all‐cause mortality rates were 4.58, 4.60, 6.22, and 6.83 per 100 person‐years for CCS classes I, II, III, and IV, respectively. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios for all‐cause mortality comparing CCS II, III, and IV with those in class I were 1.05 (95% CI, 0.95–1.15), 1.33 (95% CI, 1.20–1.47), and 1.48 (95% CI, 1.25–1.76), respectively. The multivariable hazard ratio comparing CCS IV with CCS I was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.09–1.33) for all‐cause hospitalization, 1.25 (95% CI, 0.96–1.64) for acute coronary syndrome hospitalizations, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.80–1.26) for heart failure hospitalizations, 1.05 (95% CI, 0.88–1.25) for atrial fibrillation hospitalizations, 1.92 (95% CI, 1.40–2.64) for percutaneous coronary intervention, and 2.51 (95% CI, 1.99–3.16) for coronary artery bypass grafting surgery.

Conclusions

Natural language processing–extracted CCS classification was positively associated with all‐cause mortality and healthcare utilization, demonstrating the prognostic importance of anginal symptom assessment and documentation.

See Editorial Mehta and Bradley

Making Sense of Big Textual Data for Health Care: Findings from the Section on Clinical Natural Language Processing

Objectives: To summarize recent research and present a selection of the best papers published in 2016 in the field of clinical Natural Language Processing (NLP). Method: A survey of the literature was performed by the two section editors of the IMIA Yearbook NLP section. Bibliographic databases were searched for papers with a focus on NLP efforts applied to clinical texts or aimed at a clinical outcome. Papers were automatically ranked and then manually reviewed based on titles and abstracts. A shortlist of candidate best papers was first selected by the section editors before being peer-reviewed by independent external reviewers. Results: The five clinical NLP best papers provide a contribution that ranges from emerging original foundational methods to transitioning solid established research results to a practical clinical setting. They offer a framework for abbreviation disambiguation and coreference resolution, a classification method to identify clinically useful sentences, an analysis of counseling conversations to improve support to patients with mental disorder and grounding of gradable adjectives. Conclusions: Clinical NLP continued to thrive in 2016, with an increasing number of contributions towards applications compared to fundamental methods. Fundamental work addresses increasingly complex problems such as lexical semantics, coreference resolution, and discourse analysis. Research results translate into freely available tools, mainly for English.