Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 476

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Automated Identification of Postoperative Complications Within an Electronic Medical Record Using Natural Language Processing

Murff, Harvey J., FitzHenry, Fern, Matheny, Michael E., Gentry, Nancy, Kotter, Kristen L., Crimin, Kimberly, Dittus, Robert S., Rosen, Amy K., Elkin, Peter L., Brown, Steven H., Speroff, Theodore·2011·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Currently most automated methods to identify patient safety occurrences rely on administrative data codes; however, free-text searches of electronic medical records could represent an additional surveillance approach. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a natural language processing search-approach to identify postoperative surgical complications within a comprehensive electronic medical record. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Cross-sectional study involving 2974 patients undergoing inpatient surgical procedures at 6 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) medical centers from 1999 to 2006. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative occurrences of acute renal failure requiring dialysis, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, pneumonia, or myocardial infarction identified through medical record review as part of the VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. We determined the sensitivity and specificity of the natural language processing approach to identify these complications and compared its performance with patient safety indicators that use discharge coding information. RESULTS: The proportion of postoperative events for each sample was 2% (39 of 1924) for acute renal failure requiring dialysis, 0.7% (18 of 2327) for pulmonary embolism, 1% (29 of 2327) for deep vein thrombosis, 7% (61 of 866) for sepsis, 16% (222 of 1405) for pneumonia, and 2% (35 of 1822) for myocardial infarction. Natural language processing correctly identified 82% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67%-91%) of acute renal failure cases compared with 38% (95% CI, 25%-54%) for patient safety indicators. Similar results were obtained for venous thromboembolism (59%, 95% CI, 44%-72% vs 46%, 95% CI, 32%-60%), pneumonia (64%, 95% CI, 58%-70% vs 5%, 95% CI, 3%-9%), sepsis (89%, 95% CI, 78%-94% vs 34%, 95% CI, 24%-47%), and postoperative myocardial infarction (91%, 95% CI, 78%-97%) vs 89%, 95% CI, 74%-96%). Both natural language processing and patient safety indicators were highly specific for these diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing inpatient surgical procedures at VA medical centers, natural language processing analysis of electronic medical records to identify postoperative complications had higher sensitivity and lower specificity compared with patient safety indicators based on discharge coding.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2011.1204

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 20 references

Cited by

See all 476

Metadata

Authors
Murff, H. J., FitzHenry, F., Matheny, M. E., Gentry, N., Kotter, K. L., Crimin, K., Dittus, R. S., Rosen, A. K., Elkin, P. L., Brown, S. H., & Speroff, T.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2011-08-24
Volume
306
Issue
8
Pages
848-55
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2009790391
Cited by
476
References
20
FWCI
26.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automated Identification of Postoperative Complications Within an Electronic Medical Record Using Natural Language Processing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2011.1204
The paper
Murff, H. J., FitzHenry, F., Matheny, M. E., Gentry, N., Kotter, K. L., Crimin, K., Dittus, R. S., Rosen, A. K., Elkin, P. L., Brown, S. H., & Speroff, T. (2011). Automated Identification of Postoperative Complications Within an Electronic Medical Record Using Natural Language Processing. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.1204

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.