Validating a natural language processing tool to exclude psychogenic nonepileptic seizures in electronic medical record-based epilepsy research
Abstract
Rationale As electronic health record (EHR) systems become more available, they will serve as an important resource for collecting epidemiologic data in epilepsy research. However, since clinicians do not have a systematic method for coding psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES), patients with PNES are often misclassified as having epilepsy, leading to sampling error. This study validates a natural language processing (NLP) tool that uses linguistic information to help identify patients with PNES. Methods Using the VA national clinical database, 2200 notes of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who completed video electroencephalograph (VEEG) monitoring were reviewed manually, and the veterans were identified as having documented PNES or not. Reviewers identified PNES-related vocabulary to inform a NLP tool called Yale cTakes Extension (YTEX). Using NLP techniques, YTEX annotates syntactic constructs, named entities, and their negation context in the EHR. These annotations are passed to a classifier to detect patients without PNES. The classifier was evaluated by calculating positive predictive values (PPVs), sensitivity, and F-score. Results Of the 742 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who received a diagnosis of epilepsy or seizure disorder by VEEG, 44 had documented events on VEEG: 22 veterans (3.0%) had definite PNES only, 20 (2.7%) had probable PNES, and 2 (0.3%) had both PNES and epilepsy documented. The remaining 698 veterans did not have events captured during the VEEG admission and/or did not have a definitive diagnosis. Our classifier achieved a PPV of 93%, a sensitivity of 99%, and a F-score of 96%. Conclusion Our study demonstrates that the YTEX NLP tool and classifier is highly accurate in excluding PNES, diagnosed with VEEG, in EHR systems. The tool may be very valuable in preventing false positive identification of patients with epilepsy in EHR-based epidemiologic research.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Hamid et al. [167]'s NLP tool was proficient in detecting concepts indicative of PNES and those negating its presence.
“This algorithm was proficient in detecting concepts indicative of PNES and those negating its presence.”
From A Comprehensive Review on Synergy of Multi-Modal Data and AI Technologies in Medical Diagnosis (2024) · cites this paper as [167]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 7 · Cited by 42
- Authors
- Hamid, H., Fodeh, S. J., Lizama, A. G., Czlapinski, R., Pugh, M. J., LaFrance, W. C., & Brandt, C. A.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
- Venue
- Epilepsy & Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-12
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 578-580
- ISSN
- 1525-5050 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2044757964
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 2.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Epilepsy & Behavior (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (I01 HX000915)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Epilepsy research and treatment
- Keywords
- psychogenic non-epileptic seizures, natural language processing, electronic health records, video electroencephalography, veterans, named entity recognition, negation detection, epilepsy epidemiology
- MeSH terms
- Epilepsy, Female, Humans, Male, Natural Language Processing, United States, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Reproducibility of Results, Biomedical Research, Iraq War, 2003-2011, Afghan Campaign 2001-, Electronic Health Records
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