Cited by 38Speech and dialogue systemsBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Automatic analysis of medical dialogue in the home hemodialysis domain: Structure induction and summarization

Open access
Lacson, Ronilda C., Barzilay, Regina, Long, William J.·2006·Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Abstract

Spoken medical dialogue is a valuable source of information for patients and caregivers. This work presents a first step towards automatic analysis and summarization of spoken medical dialogue. We first abstract a dialogue into a sequence of semantic categories using linguistic and contextual features integrated in a supervised machine-learning framework. Our model has a classification accuracy of 73%, compared to 33% achieved by a majority baseline (p<0.01). We then describe and implement a summarizer that utilizes this automatically induced structure. Our evaluation results indicate that automatically generated summaries exhibit high resemblance to summaries written by humans. In addition, task-based evaluation shows that physicians can reasonably answer questions related to patient care by looking at the automatically generated summaries alone, in contrast to the physicians' performance when they were given summaries from a naïve summarizer (p<0.05). This work demonstrates the feasibility of automatically structuring and summarizing spoken medical dialogue.

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 · 10.1016/j.jbi.2005.12.009

Cites

68 of 68 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?

  • ASR produces a transcript of the clinician-patient conversation that lacks clear boundaries and structure due to the unconstrained nature of conversations.

    “ASR produces a transcript of the clinician–patient conversation that lacks clear boundaries and structure due to the unconstrained nature of conversations.22”

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

1 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Document Understanding Workshop. HLT/NAACL Annual Meet- ing. Boston, MA. May, 2004. In: http://duc.nist.gov/. Accessed on: June 16, 2005.
  2. Marcu D. Discourse trees are good indicators of importance in text. In: Mani, Maybury, editor. Advances in automatic text summariza- tion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1999. p. 123-36.
  3. Teufel S, Moens M. Argumentative classification of extracted sentences as a first step towards flexible abstracting. In: Mani, Maybury, editor. Advances in automatic text summarization. Cam- bridge, MA: MIT Press; 1999. p. 155-76.
  4. Lacson R, Lacson E, Szolovits P. Discourse structure of medical dialogue. In: Proceedings of Medinfo. Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press; 2004;1703.
  5. Bland JM, Altman DG. The odds ratio. BMJ 2000;320:1468.
  6. Teufel S. Task-based evaluation of summary quality: describing relationships between scientific papers. In: Proceedings of NAACL- 01 workshop on automatic text summarization. Germany: Morgan Kaufman Publishers; 2001.
  7. Pallett D, Fiscus J, Garofolo J. Resource management corpus: September 1992 test set benchmark test results. In: Proceedings of ARPA microelectronics technology office continuous speech recog- nition workshop (Stanford, CA): September 1992. p. 21-2.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lacson, R. C., Barzilay, R., & Long, W. J.
Affiliations
MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Lacson, Ronilda C.
Venue
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-10
Volume
39
Issue
5
Pages
541-555
ISSN
1532-0464 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2021473443
Cited by
38
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
2.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Biomedical Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
National Science Foundation (0415865, 0448168)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
home hemodialysis, dialogue summarization, patient-provider communication
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Communication, Hemodialysis, Home, Humans, Patient Education as Topic, Information Storage and Retrieval

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