Cited by 94Machine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareMental Health via Writing

Natural language processing and machine learning to identify alcohol misuse from the electronic health record in trauma patients: development and internal validation

Open access
Afshar, Majid, Phillips, Andrew, Karnik, Niranjan, Mueller, Jeanne, To, Daniel, Gonzalez, Richard, Price, Ron, Cooper, Richard +2 more·2019·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

Objective: Alcohol misuse is present in over a quarter of trauma patients. Information in the clinical notes of the electronic health record of trauma patients may be used for phenotyping tasks with natural language processing (NLP) and supervised machine learning. The objective of this study is to train and validate an NLP classifier for identifying patients with alcohol misuse. Materials and Methods: An observational cohort of 1422 adult patients admitted to a trauma center between April 2013 and November 2016. Linguistic processing of clinical notes was performed using the clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System. The primary analysis was the binary classification of alcohol misuse. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test served as the reference standard. Results: The data corpus comprised 91 045 electronic health record notes and 16 091 features. In the final machine learning classifier, 16 features were selected from the first 24 hours of notes for identifying alcohol misuse. The classifier’s performance in the validation cohort had an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.85). Sensitivity and specificity were at 56.0% (95% CI, 44.1% to 68.0%) and 88.9% (95% CI, 84.4% to 92.8%). The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test demonstrates the classifier fits the data well (P = .17). A simpler rule-based keyword approach had a decrease in sensitivity when compared with the NLP classifier from 56.0% to 18.2%. Conclusions: The NLP classifier has adequate predictive validity for identifying alcohol misuse in trauma centers. External validation is needed before its application to augment screening.

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 · 10.1093/jamia/ocy166

Cites

36 of 36 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?

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: 2

  1. [35]35. Bonevski B, Regan T, Paul C, Baker AL, Bisquera A. Associations between alcohol, smoking, socioeconomic status and comorbidities: evidence from the 45 and up Study. Drug Alcohol Rev 2014; 33 (2): 169–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. [36]36. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 16. Alcohol and other drug screening of hospitalized trauma patients. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 95–3041. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1995. [PubMed] [Google Scholar] Associated Data This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Afshar, M., Phillips, A., Karnik, N., Mueller, J., To, D., Gonzalez, R., Price, R., Cooper, R., Joyce, C., & Dligach, D.
Affiliations
  • Loyola University Chicago (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
  • Loyola University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Afshar, Majid
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2019-01-02
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
254-261
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W2908358765
Cited by
94
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5
FWCI
4.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Illinois Chicago
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
Keywords
alcohol abuse, trauma patients, electronic health records, natural language processing, clinical notes, phenotyping, Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, alcohol screening, clinical text mining
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Adult, Alcoholism, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Natural Language Processing, ROC Curve, Trauma Centers, Wounds and Injuries, Cohort Studies, 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