Natural language processing and machine learning to enable automatic extraction and classification of patients’ smoking status from electronic medical records

References

• Gray BH, Bowden T, Johansen I, Koch S. Electronic health records: an international perspective on “meaningful use”. Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2011;28:1–18.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zeng QT, Goryachev S, Weiss S, Sordo M, Murphy SN, Lazarus R. Extracting principal diagnosis, co-morbidity and smoking status for asthma research: evaluation of a natural language processing system. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2006;6:30. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-6-30
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reilly BM, Evans AT. Translating clinical research into clinical practice: impact of using prediction rules to make decisions. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144:201–9. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-3-200602070-00009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ 2005;330:765. doi:10.1136/bmj.38398.500764.8F
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uzuner O, Goldstein I, Luo Y, Kohane I. Identifying patient smoking status from medical discharge records. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:14–24. doi:10.1197/jamia.M2408
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Figueroa RL, Soto DA, Pino EJ. Identifying and extracting patient smoking status information from clinical narrative texts in Spanish. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2014;2014:2710–3. doi:10.1109/EMBC.2014.6944182
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Savova GK, Ogren PV, Duffy PH, Buntrock JD, Chute CG. Mayo clinic NLP system for patient smoking status identification. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:25–8. doi:10.1197/jamia.M2437
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel J, Siddiqui Z, Krishnan A, Thyvalikakath T. Leveraging electronic dental record data to classify patients based on their smoking intensity. Methods Inf Med. 2018;57:253–60. doi:10.1055/s-0039-1681088
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall M, Frank E, Holmes G, Pfahringer B, Reutemann P, Witten IH. The WEKA data mining software: an update. Sigkdd Explor Newsl. 2009;11:10–8. doi:10.1145/1656274.1656278
   Google Scholar
• Larsson K, Janson C, Lisspers K, Jørgensen L, Stratelis G, Telg G, et al. Combination of budesonide/formoterol more effective than fluticasone/salmeterol in preventing exacerbations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the PATHOS study. J Intern Med. 2013;273:584–94. doi:10.1111/joim.12067
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rockberg J, Jørgensen L, Taylor B, Sobocki P, Johansson G. Risk of mortality and recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndromes on high intensity statin treatment. Prev Med Rep. 2017;6:203–9. doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2017.03.001
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schildt EB, Eriksson M, Hardell L, Magnuson A. Oral snuff, smoking habits and alcohol consumption in relation to oral cancer in a Swedish case-control study. Int J Cancer. 1998;77:341–6. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19980729)77:3<341::AID-IJC6>3.0.CO;2-O
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huhtasaari F, Asplund K, Lundberg V, Stegmayr B, Wester PO. Tobacco and myocardial infarction: is snuff less dangerous than cigarettes? BMJ. 1992;305:1252–6. doi:10.1136/bmj.305.6864.1252
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joachims T. Text categorization with support vector machines: learning with many relevant features. In: Nédellec C, Rouveirol C, editors. ECML. Berlin: Springer; 1998. p. 137–42.
   Google Scholar
• Quinlan JR. Induction of decision trees. Mach Learn. 1986;1:81–106. doi:10.1007/BF00116251
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Prevalence of smoking any tobacco products among adults aged greater than or equal to 15 years [Internet]. [cited 2018 Nov 20]. Available from: http://gamapserver.who.int/gho/interactive_charts/tobacco/use/atlas.html
   Google Scholar
• Platt J. Sequential minimal optimization: a fast algorithm for training support vector machines. Adv Kernel Methods Support Vector Learn 1998;208:1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Beyer K, Goldstein J, Ramakrishnan R, Shaft U. When is “nearest neighbor” meaningful? Lect Notes Comput Sci. 1999;1540:217–35.
   Google Scholar
• McCallum A, Nigam K. A comparison of event models for naive Bayes text classification. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning. AAAI Press; 1998. p. 41–8.
   Google Scholar
• Patil TR, Sherekar SS. Performance analysis of naive Bayes and J48 classification algorithm for data classification. Int J Comput Sci Appl 2013;6:251–61.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen T. Determining smoker status using supervised and unsupervised learning with lexical features. Proceedings of the i2b2 Workshop on Challenges in Natural Language Processing for Clinical Data. 2006. Available as JAMIA on-line data supplement at www.jamia.org.
   Google Scholar
• Aramaki E, Imai T, Miyo K, Ohe K. Patient status classification by using rule based sentence extraction and BM25-kNN based classifier. Proceedings of the i2b2 Workshop on Challenges in Natural Language Processing for Clinical Data. 2006. Available as JAMIA on-line data supplement at www.jamia.org.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang H, Li D. Naïve Bayes text classifier. Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Granular Computing, GrC. 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Frank E, Bouckaert RR. Naive Bayes for text classification with unbalanced classes. In: Fürnkranz J, Scheffer T, Spiliopoulou M, editors. Knowledge discovery in databases: PKDD 2006. Vol. 4213. Berlin: Springer; 2006. p. 503–10.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman R, Sanger J. The text mining handbook: advanced approaches in analyzing unstructured data. Imagine 2007;34:410.
   Google Scholar
• Bhosale D, Ade R, Deshmukh PR. Feature selection based classification using naive Bayes, J48 and support vector machine. IJCA. 2014;99:14–8. doi:10.5120/17456-8202
   Google Scholar
• Park SH, Goo JM, Jo CH. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: practical review for radiologists. Korean J Radiol. 2004;5:11–8. doi:10.3348/kjr.2004.5.1.11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szarvas G, Iván S, Bánhalmi A, Csirik J. Automatic extraction of semantic content from medical discharge records. Proceedings of the i2b2 Work Challenges Nat Lang Process Clin Data. 2006. p. 1–5. Available as JAMIA on-line data supplement at www.jamia.org
   Google Scholar
• Cohen AM. Five-way smoking status classification using text hot-spot identification and error-correcting output codes. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:32–5. doi:10.1197/jamia.M2434
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark C, Good K, Jezierny L, Macpherson M, Wilson B, Chajewska U. Identifying smokers with a medical extraction system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:36–9. doi:10.1197/jamia.M2442
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinze DT, Morsch ML, Potter BC, Sheffer RE. Medical i2b2 NLP smoking challenge: the A-Life system architecture and methodology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:40–3. doi:10.1197/jamia.M2438
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wicentowski R, Sydes MR. Using implicit information to identify smoking status in smoke-blind medical discharge summaries. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:29–31. doi:10.1197/jamia.M2440
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sohn S, Savova GK. Mayo clinic smoking status classification system: extensions and improvements. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2009;2009:619–23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Joachims T. Making large scale SVM learning practical. In: Schölkopf B, Burges CJC, Smola AJ, editors. Advances in kernel methods. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1999. p. 169–84.
   Google Scholar
• Kotsiantis S. Supervised machine learning: a review of classification techniques. Informatica 2007;31:249–68.
   Google Scholar
• Chiticariu L, Reiss FR, Li Y. Rule-based information extraction is dead! Long live rule-based information extraction systems! Conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, 2013. p. 827–32.
   Google Scholar
• Gustafson P, Measurement error and misclassification in statistics and epidemiology: impacts and Bayesian adjustments. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Corbin M, Haslett S, Pearce N, Maule M, Greenland S. A comparison of sensitivity-specificity imputation, direct imputation and fully Bayesian analysis to adjust for exposure misclassification when validation data are unavailable. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46:1063–72. doi:10.1093/ije/dyx027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafson P, Le ND, Saskin R. Case-control analysis with partial knowledge of exposure misclassification probabilities. Biometrics 2001;57:598–609. doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2001.00598.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang CL, Wang CJ. A GA-based feature selection and parameters optimizationfor support vector machines. Expert Syst Appl. 2006;31:231–40. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2005.09.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss SM, Indurkhya N, Zhang T, Emerging directions. In: Weiss SM, Indurkhya N, Zhang T, editors. Fundamentals of predictive text mining. 2nd ed. London: Springer-Verlag; 2015. p. 211–13.
   Google Scholar