↓ Skip to main content

Improved de-identification of physician notes through integrative modeling of both public and private medical text

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
2 patents

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Improved de-identification of physician notes through integrative modeling of both public and private medical text
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-13-112
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew J McMurry, Britt Fitch, Guergana Savova, Isaac S Kohane, Ben Y Reis

Abstract

Physician notes routinely recorded during patient care represent a vast and underutilized resource for human disease studies on a population scale. Their use in research is primarily limited by the need to separate confidential patient information from clinical annotations, a process that is resource-intensive when performed manually. This study seeks to create an automated method for de-identifying physician notes that does not require large amounts of private information: in addition to training a model to recognize Protected Health Information (PHI) within private physician notes, we reverse the problem and train a model to recognize non-PHI words and phrases that appear in public medical texts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 66 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Other 9 13%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 17 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Engineering 4 6%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 19 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 03 March 2021.
All research outputs
#3,612,220
of 22,723,682 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#307
of 1,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,505
of 207,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#8
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,723,682 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,982 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 207,304 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.