OBJECTIVE: To research computational methods for coreference resolution in the clinical narrative and build a system implementing the best methods. METHODS: The Ontology Development and Information Extraction corpus annotated for coreference relations consists of 7214 coreferential markables, forming 5992 pairs and 1304 chains. We trained classifiers with semantic, syntactic, and surface features pruned by feature selection. For the three system components--for the resolution of relative pronouns, personal pronouns, and noun phrases--we experimented with support vector machines with linear and radial basis function (RBF) kernels, decision trees, and perceptrons. Evaluation of algorithms and varied feature sets was performed using standard metrics. RESULTS: The best performing combination is support vector machines with an RBF kernel and all features (MUC score=0.352, B(3)=0.690, CEAF=0.486, BLANC=0.596) outperforming a traditional decision tree baseline. DISCUSSION: The application showed good performance similar to performance on general English text. The main error source was sentence distances exceeding a window of 10 sentences between markables. A possible solution to this problem is hinted at by the fact that coreferent markables sometimes occurred in predictable (although distant) note sections. Another system limitation is failure to fully utilize synonymy and ontological knowledge. Future work will investigate additional ways to incorporate syntactic features into the coreference problem. CONCLUSION: We investigated computational methods for coreference resolution in the clinical narrative. The best methods are released as modules of the open source Clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System and Ontology Development and Information Extraction platforms.
OBJECTIVE: To research computational methods for coreference resolution in the clinical narrative and build a system implementing the best methods. METHODS: The Ontology Development and Information Extraction corpus annotated for coreference relations consists of 7214 coreferential markables, forming 5992 pairs and 1304 chains. We trained classifiers with semantic, syntactic, and surface features pruned by feature selection. For the three system components--for the resolution of relative pronouns, personal pronouns, and noun phrases--we experimented with support vector machines with linear and radial basis function (RBF) kernels, decision trees, and perceptrons. Evaluation of algorithms and varied feature sets was performed using standard metrics. RESULTS: The best performing combination is support vector machines with an RBF kernel and all features (MUC score=0.352, B(3)=0.690, CEAF=0.486, BLANC=0.596) outperforming a traditional decision tree baseline. DISCUSSION: The application showed good performance similar to performance on general English text. The main error source was sentence distances exceeding a window of 10 sentences between markables. A possible solution to this problem is hinted at by the fact that coreferent markables sometimes occurred in predictable (although distant) note sections. Another system limitation is failure to fully utilize synonymy and ontological knowledge. Future work will investigate additional ways to incorporate syntactic features into the coreference problem. CONCLUSION: We investigated computational methods for coreference resolution in the clinical narrative. The best methods are released as modules of the open source Clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System and Ontology Development and Information Extraction platforms.
Authors: Brian L Cairns; Rodney D Nielsen; James J Masanz; James H Martin; Martha S Palmer; Wayne H Ward; Guergana K Savova Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2011-10-22
Authors: Guergana K Savova; James J Masanz; Philip V Ogren; Jiaping Zheng; Sunghwan Sohn; Karin C Kipper-Schuler; Christopher G Chute Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Angus Roberts; Robert Gaizauskas; Mark Hepple; George Demetriou; Yikun Guo; Ian Roberts; Andrea Setzer Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2009-01-23 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Anni Coden; Guergana Savova; Igor Sominsky; Michael Tanenblatt; James Masanz; Karin Schuler; James Cooper; Wei Guan; Piet C de Groen Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-12-27 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Jung-wei Fan; Elly W Yang; Min Jiang; Rashmi Prasad; Richard M Loomis; Daniel S Zisook; Josh C Denny; Hua Xu; Yang Huang Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Jyotishman Pathak; Kent R Bailey; Calvin E Beebe; Steven Bethard; David C Carrell; Pei J Chen; Dmitriy Dligach; Cory M Endle; Lacey A Hart; Peter J Haug; Stanley M Huff; Vinod C Kaggal; Dingcheng Li; Hongfang Liu; Kyle Marchant; James Masanz; Timothy Miller; Thomas A Oniki; Martha Palmer; Kevin J Peterson; Susan Rea; Guergana K Savova; Craig R Stancl; Sunghwan Sohn; Harold R Solbrig; Dale B Suesse; Cui Tao; David P Taylor; Les Westberg; Stephen Wu; Ning Zhuo; Christopher G Chute Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-11-04 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Nicolas Garcelon; Antoine Neuraz; Vincent Benoit; Rémi Salomon; Anita Burgun Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Daniel Albright; Arrick Lanfranchi; Anwen Fredriksen; William F Styler; Colin Warner; Jena D Hwang; Jinho D Choi; Dmitriy Dligach; Rodney D Nielsen; James Martin; Wayne Ward; Martha Palmer; Guergana K Savova Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Kevin Bretonnel Cohen; Benjamin Glass; Hansel M Greiner; Katherine Holland-Bouley; Shannon Standridge; Ravindra Arya; Robert Faist; Diego Morita; Francesco Mangano; Brian Connolly; Tracy Glauser; John Pestian Journal: Biomed Inform Insights Date: 2016-05-22