Literature DB >> 17612476

The identification of clinically important elements within medical journal abstracts: Patient-Population-Problem, Exposure-Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Duration and Results (PECODR).

Martin Dawes1, Pierre Pluye, Laura Shea, Roland Grad, Arlene Greenberg, Jian-Yun Nie.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Information retrieval in primary care is becoming more difficult as the volume of medical information held in electronic databases expands. The lexical structure of this information might permit automatic indexing and improved retrieval.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the possibility of identifying the key elements of clinical studies, namely Patient-Population-Problem, Exposure-Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Duration and Results (PECODR), from abstracts of medical journals.
METHODS: We used a convenience sample of 20 synopses from the journal Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) and their matching original journal article abstracts obtained from PubMed. Three independent primary care professionals identified PECODR-related extracts of text. Rules were developed to define each PECODR element and the selection process of characters, words, phrases and sentences. From the extracts of text related to PECODR elements, potential lexical patterns that might help identify those elements were proposed and assessed using NVivo software.
RESULTS: A total of 835 PECODR-related text extracts containing 41,263 individual text characters were identified from 20 EBM journal synopses. There were 759 extracts in the corresponding PubMed abstracts containing 31,947 characters. PECODR elements were found in nearly all abstracts and synopses with the exception of duration. There was agreement on 86.6% of the extracts from the 20 EBM synopses and 85.0% on the corresponding PubMed abstracts. After consensus this rose to 98.4% and 96.9% respectively. We found potential text patterns in the Comparison, Outcome and Results elements of both EBM synopses and PubMed abstracts. Some phrases and words are used frequently and are specific for these elements in both synopses and abstracts.
CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest a PECODR-related structure exists in medical abstracts and that there might be lexical patterns specific to these elements. More sophisticated computer-assisted lexical-semantic analysis might refine these results, and pave the way to automating PECODR indexing, and improve information retrieval in primary care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17612476

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Inform Prim Care        ISSN: 1475-9985


  10 in total

1.  A characterization of clinical questions asked by rehabilitation therapists.

Authors:  Lorie Andrea Kloda; Joan C Bartlett
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2014-04

2.  Data extraction methods for systematic review (semi)automation: A living systematic review.

Authors:  Lena Schmidt; Babatunde K Olorisade; Luke A McGuinness; James Thomas; Julian P T Higgins
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2021-05-19

3.  Combining classifiers for robust PICO element detection.

Authors:  Florian Boudin; Jian-Yun Nie; Joan C Bartlett; Roland Grad; Pierre Pluye; Martin Dawes
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-05-15       Impact factor: 2.796

4.  Automatic classification of sentences to support Evidence Based Medicine.

Authors:  Su Nam Kim; David Martinez; Lawrence Cavedon; Lars Yencken
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-03-29       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 5.  Automating data extraction in systematic reviews: a systematic review.

Authors:  Siddhartha R Jonnalagadda; Pawan Goyal; Mark D Huffman
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2015-06-15

6.  Interactive Visual Displays for Interpreting the Results of Clinical Trials: Formative Evaluation With Case Vignettes.

Authors:  Jiantao Bian; Charlene Weir; Prasad Unni; Damian Borbolla; Thomas Reese; Yik-Ki Jacob Wan; Guilherme Del Fiol
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2018-06-25       Impact factor: 5.428

7.  Combination of conditional random field with a rule based method in the extraction of PICO elements.

Authors:  Samir Chabou; Michal Iglewski
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 2.796

8.  Improving reference prioritisation with PICO recognition.

Authors:  Austin J Brockmeier; Meizhi Ju; Piotr Przybyła; Sophia Ananiadou
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 2.796

9.  Are decision trees a feasible knowledge representation to guide extraction of critical information from randomized controlled trial reports?

Authors:  Grace Y Chung; Enrico Coiera
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2008-10-28       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  Sentence retrieval for abstracts of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Grace Y Chung
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2009-02-10       Impact factor: 2.796

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.