Bias of Inaccurate Disease Mentions in Electronic Health Record-based Phenotyping

OBJECTIVES Electronic health record (EHR)-based phenotyping is an automated technique for identifying patients diagnosed with a particular disease using EHR data. However, EHR-based phenotyping has difficulties in achieving satisfactorily high performance because clinical notes include disease mentions that ultimately signify something other than the patient's diagnosis (such as differential diagnosis or screening). Our objective is to quantify the influence of such disease mentions on EHR-based phenotyping performance. METHODS Physicians manually reviewed whether the disease mentions indicated the patients' diseases in 487,300 clinical notes of 4,430 patients. Particular focus was placed on disease mentions that did not signify the patient's diagnosis even though they did not have any syntactic modifier or indicator in the same sentences. Patients were then classified according to whether their clinical notes included such disease mentions. RESULTS Among the patients whose clinical notes included disease mentions without any modifier or indicator, the proportion of patients whose disease mentions signified the patients' diagnosis was 78.1% (on average). This value can be interpreted as the bias of disease mentions that did not signify the patient's diagnosis on the precision of EHR-based phenotyping by extracting disease mentions from clinical notes. CONCLUSION This study quantified the bias occurred owing to disease mentions that incorrectly signify a patient's diagnosis in the value of precision of EHR-based phenotyping from four dataset types. The results of this study will help researchers in diverse research environments with different available data types.

[1]  W. Hersh Adding value to the electronic health record through secondary use of data for quality assurance, research, and surveillance. , 2007, The American journal of managed care.

[2]  T. Murdoch,et al.  The inevitable application of big data to health care. , 2013, JAMA.

[3]  Sunghwan Sohn,et al.  Mayo clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System (cTAKES): architecture, component evaluation and applications , 2010, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[4]  J. Pathak,et al.  Electronic health records-driven phenotyping: challenges, recent advances, and perspectives. , 2013, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[5]  Pedro J. Caraballo,et al.  Impact of data fragmentation across healthcare centers on the accuracy of a high-throughput clinical phenotyping algorithm for specifying subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[6]  J. Aviña-Zubieta,et al.  Validity of Heart Failure Diagnoses in Administrative Databases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2014, PloS one.

[7]  K. Bretonnel Cohen,et al.  Clinical Information Extraction at the CLEF eHealth Evaluation lab 2016 , 2016, CLEF.

[8]  Shelley A. Rusincovitch,et al.  A comparison of phenotype definitions for diabetes mellitus. , 2013, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[9]  Sanna Salanterä,et al.  Overview of the ShARe/CLEF eHealth Evaluation Lab 2013 , 2013, CLEF.

[10]  Kazuhiko Ohe,et al.  The Impact of "Possible Patients" on Phenotyping Algorithms: Electronic Phenotype Algorithms Can Only Be Reproduced by Sharing Detailed Annotation Criteria , 2017, MedInfo.

[11]  Pedro M. Domingos A few useful things to know about machine learning , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[12]  Tomoko Ohkuma,et al.  Overview of the NTCIR-11 MedNLP-2 Task , 2014, NTCIR.

[13]  Franck Dernoncourt,et al.  Comparing deep learning and concept extraction based methods for patient phenotyping from clinical narratives , 2018, PloS one.

[14]  Stephen B. Johnson,et al.  A review of approaches to identifying patient phenotype cohorts using electronic health records , 2013, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[15]  Özlem Uzuner,et al.  A systematic comparison of feature space effects on disease classifier performance for phenotype identification of five diseases , 2015, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[16]  Hisashi Kashima,et al.  AdaFlock: Adaptive Feature Discovery for Human-in-the-loop Predictive Modeling , 2018, AAAI.

[17]  Eiji Aramaki,et al.  MedEx/J: A One-Scan Simple and Fast NLP Tool for Japanese Clinical Texts , 2017, MedInfo.

[18]  George Hripcsak,et al.  Automated encoding of clinical documents based on natural language processing. , 2004, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[19]  Prakash M. Nadkarni,et al.  Overcoming barriers to NLP for clinical text: the role of shared tasks and the need for additional creative solutions , 2011, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[20]  Pierre Zweigenbaum,et al.  Clinical Natural Language Processing in languages other than English: opportunities and challenges , 2018, Journal of Biomedical Semantics.

[21]  Charles Safran,et al.  Toward a national framework for the secondary use of health data: an American Medical Informatics Association White Paper. , 2007, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[22]  Kazuhiko Ohe,et al.  Development of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Phenotyping Framework Using Expert Knowledge and Machine Learning Approach , 2017, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[23]  Mit Critical Data Secondary Analysis of Electronic Health Records , 2016 .

[24]  Cathryn M. Delude Deep phenotyping: The details of disease , 2015, Nature.

[25]  Hyeon-Eui Kim,et al.  Identification and Extraction of Family History Information from Clinical Reports , 2008, AMIA.

[26]  Jie Xu,et al.  Review and evaluation of electronic health records-driven phenotype algorithm authoring tools for clinical and translational research , 2015, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[27]  C. Sudlow,et al.  Accuracy of Electronic Health Record Data for Identifying Stroke Cases in Large-Scale Epidemiological Studies: A Systematic Review from the UK Biobank Stroke Outcomes Group , 2015, PloS one.

[28]  L. Weed Medical records that guide and teach. , 1968, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  Charles P. Friedman,et al.  Is the problem list in the eye of the beholder? An exploration of consistency across physicians , 2016, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[30]  Spiros Denaxas,et al.  Evaluation of Semantic Web Technologies for Storing Computable Definitions of Electronic Health Records Phenotyping Algorithms , 2017, AMIA.

[31]  Guilherme Del Fiol,et al.  Health information technology adoption: Understanding research protocols and outcome measurements for IT interventions in health care , 2016, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[32]  Melissa A. Basford,et al.  Validation of electronic medical record-based phenotyping algorithms: results and lessons learned from the eMERGE network. , 2013, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[33]  George Hripcsak,et al.  Next-generation phenotyping of electronic health records , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[34]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  Are You Sure That This Happened? Assessing the Factuality Degree of Events in Text , 2012, CL.

[35]  Yi Qian,et al.  Joint segmentation and named entity recognition using dual decomposition in Chinese discharge summaries. , 2014, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[36]  Joshua C. Denny,et al.  Combining billing codes, clinical notes, and medications from electronic health records provides superior phenotyping performance , 2016, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[37]  V. Dasa,et al.  The Implications of Inaccuracy: Comparison of Coding in Heterotopic Ossification and Associated Trauma. , 2017, Orthopedics.

[38]  Paul A. Harris,et al.  PheKB: a catalog and workflow for creating electronic phenotype algorithms for transportability , 2016, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..