Cited by 38Artificial Intelligence in HealthcareHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementMachine Learning in Healthcare

Natural Language Processing for Adjudication of Heart Failure in a Multicenter Clinical Trial: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Cunningham, Jonathan W., Singh, Pulkit, Reeder, Christopher, Claggett, Brian, Marti-Castellote, Pablo M., Lau, Emily S., Khurshid, Shaan, Batra, Puneet +8 more·2024·JAMA Cardiology

Abstract

Importance: The gold standard for outcome adjudication in clinical trials is medical record review by a physician clinical events committee (CEC), which requires substantial time and expertise. Automated adjudication of medical records by natural language processing (NLP) may offer a more resource-efficient alternative but this approach has not been validated in a multicenter setting. Objective: To externally validate the Community Care Cohort Project (C3PO) NLP model for heart failure (HF) hospitalization adjudication, which was previously developed and tested within one health care system, compared to gold-standard CEC adjudication in a multicenter clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective analysis of the Influenza Vaccine to Effectively Stop Cardio Thoracic Events and Decompensated Heart Failure (INVESTED) trial, which compared 2 influenza vaccines in 5260 participants with cardiovascular disease at 157 sites in the US and Canada between September 2016 and January 2019. Analysis was performed from November 2022 to October 2023. Exposures: Individual sites submitted medical records for each hospitalization. The central INVESTED CEC and the C3PO NLP model independently adjudicated whether the cause of hospitalization was HF using the prepared hospitalization dossier. The C3PO NLP model was fine-tuned (C3PO + INVESTED) and a de novo NLP model was trained using half the INVESTED hospitalizations. Main Outcomes and Measures: Concordance between the C3PO NLP model HF adjudication and the gold-standard INVESTED CEC adjudication was measured by raw agreement, κ, sensitivity, and specificity. The fine-tuned and de novo INVESTED NLP models were evaluated in an internal validation cohort not used for training. Results: Among 4060 hospitalizations in 1973 patients (mean [SD] age, 66.4 [13.2] years; 514 [27.4%] female and 1432 [72.6%] male]), 1074 hospitalizations (26%) were adjudicated as HF by the CEC. There was good agreement between the C3PO NLP and CEC HF adjudications (raw agreement, 87% [95% CI, 86-88]; κ, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.66-0.72]). C3PO NLP model sensitivity was 94% (95% CI, 92-95) and specificity was 84% (95% CI, 83-85). The fine-tuned C3PO and de novo NLP models demonstrated agreement of 93% (95% CI, 92-94) and κ of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.77-0.86) and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79-0.87), respectively, vs the CEC. CEC reviewer interrater reproducibility was 94% (95% CI, 93-95; κ, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.80-0.89]). Conclusions and Relevance: The C3PO NLP model developed within 1 health care system identified HF events with good agreement relative to the gold-standard CEC in an external multicenter clinical trial. Fine-tuning the model improved agreement and approximated human reproducibility. Further study is needed to determine whether NLP will improve the efficiency of future multicenter clinical trials by identifying clinical events at scale.

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/jamacardio.2023.4859

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Combining ICD codes with pretrained transformer-based models applied to discharge summaries can improve the screening of HF hospitalizations.

    “To address this limitation, previous works have demonstrated that combining ICD codes with pretrained transformer-based models applied to discharge sum­ maries can improve the screening of HF hospitalizations [10].”

    From Assessing large language models for acute heart failure classification and information extraction from French clinical notes (2025) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) describes a transformer-based model that adjudicates HF hospitalizations from discharge summaries, and the Results report good agreement with physician adjudication. But the paper discusses ICD codes as an imprecise way to identify HF hospitalizations; it does not report improved screening from combining ICD codes with the NLP model. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [10]10. Rose T, Stevenson M, Whitehead M. The Reuters Corpus volume 1 -from yesterday's news to tomorrow's language resources. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'02). European Language Resources Association (ELRA); 2002. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/ lrec2002/pdf/80.pdf

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cunningham, J. W., Singh, P., Reeder, C., Claggett, B., Marti-Castellote, P. M., Lau, E. S., Khurshid, S., Batra, P., Lubitz, S. A., Maddah, M., Philippakis, A., Desai, A. S., Ellinor, P. T., Vardeny, O., Solomon, S. D., & Ho, J. E.
Affiliations
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Solomon, Scott D.
Venue
JAMA Cardiology
Published
2024-02-01
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
174
ISSN
2380-6583 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4388591773
Cited by
38
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 2
FWCI
8.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Heart Association (23CDA1052151)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL140224, R01HL134893, K24HL153669, K23HL169839, R01HL160003)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
Keywords
heart failure hospitalization, natural language processing, influenza vaccination, cardiovascular disease, external validation, medical records review, fine-tuning

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