↓ Skip to main content

Disorder recognition in clinical texts using multi-label structured SVM

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Disorder recognition in clinical texts using multi-label structured SVM
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1476-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wutao Lin, Donghong Ji, Yanan Lu

Abstract

Information extraction in clinical texts enables medical workers to find out problems of patients faster as well as makes intelligent diagnosis possible in the future. There has been a lot of work about disorder mention recognition in clinical narratives. But recognition of some more complicated disorder mentions like overlapping ones is still an open issue. This paper proposes a multi-label structured Support Vector Machine (SVM) based method for disorder mention recognition. We present a multi-label scheme which could be used in complicated entity recognition tasks. We performed three sets of experiments to evaluate our model. Our best F1-Score on the 2013 Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum data set is 0.7343. There are six types of labels in our multi-label scheme, all of which are represented by 24-bit binary numbers. The binary digits of each label contain information about different disorder mentions. Our multi-label method can recognize not only disorder mentions in the form of contiguous or discontiguous words but also mentions whose spans overlap with each other. The experiments indicate that our multi-label structured SVM model outperforms the condition random field (CRF) model for this disorder mention recognition task. The experiments show that our multi-label scheme surpasses the baseline. Especially for overlapping disorder mentions, the F1-Score of our multi-label scheme is 0.1428 higher than the baseline BIOHD1234 scheme. This multi-label structured SVM based approach is demonstrated to work well with this disorder recognition task. The novel multi-label scheme we presented is superior to the baseline and it can be used in other models to solve various types of complicated entity recognition tasks as well.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 20%
Student > Bachelor 4 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Librarian 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 9 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 8 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 12%
Mathematics 2 8%
Psychology 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2017.
All research outputs
#18,529,032
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,341
of 7,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,599
of 420,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#106
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,224 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.