Cited by 92Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health via WritingMachine Learning in Healthcare

Using natural language processing on electronic health records to enhance detection and prediction of psychosis risk.

Open access
Irving, Jessica, Patel, Rashmi, Oliver, Dominic, Colling, Craig, Pritchard, Megan, Broadbent, Matthew, Baldwin, Helen, Stahl, Daniel +2 more·2021·Schizophrenia Bulletin

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Using novel data mining methods such as natural language processing (NLP) on electronic health records (EHRs) for screening and detecting individuals at risk for psychosis. METHOD: The study included all patients receiving a first index diagnosis of nonorganic and nonpsychotic mental disorder within the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) NHS Foundation Trust between January 1, 2008, and July 28, 2018. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO)-regularized Cox regression was used to refine and externally validate a refined version of a five-item individualized, transdiagnostic, clinically based risk calculator previously developed (Harrell's C = 0.79) and piloted for implementation. The refined version included 14 additional NLP-predictors: tearfulness, poor appetite, weight loss, insomnia, cannabis, cocaine, guilt, irritability, delusions, hopelessness, disturbed sleep, poor insight, agitation, and paranoia. RESULTS: A total of 92 151 patients with a first index diagnosis of nonorganic and nonpsychotic mental disorder within the SLaM Trust were included in the derivation (n = 28 297) or external validation (n = 63 854) data sets. Mean age was 33.6 years, 50.7% were women, and 67.0% were of white race/ethnicity. Mean follow-up was 1590 days. The overall 6-year risk of psychosis in secondary mental health care was 3.4 (95% CI, 3.3-3.6). External validation indicated strong performance on unseen data (Harrell's C 0.85, 95% CI 0.84-0.86), an increase of 0.06 from the original model. CONCLUSIONS: Using NLP on EHRs can considerably enhance the prognostic accuracy of psychosis risk calculators. This can help identify patients at risk of psychosis who require assessment and specialized care, facilitating earlier detection and potentially improving patient outcomes.

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/schbul/sbaa126

Cites

55 of 55 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?

  • Text is important in clinical prediction modeling within psychiatry.

    “Indeed, models trained with both structured and text-based predictors performed practically equivalent to models trained with only text-based features; this underscores the importance of text in clinical prediction modeling within psychiatry.12,31”
  • Harrell C and AUROC are equivalent in binary outcomes, but direct comparisons cannot be made with censored data such as those used by Irving and colleagues.

    “Harrell C and AUROC are equivalent in binary outcomes, but direct comparisons cannot be made with censored data such as those used by Irving and colleagues.12”
  • Performance from our models predicting schizophrenia is in line with the literature, for example with Irving et al, which achieved a Harrell C of 0.79 to 0.86 for 10-year survival prediction of onset of psychosis from an index date.

    “Performance from our models predicting schizophrenia is in line with the literature, for example with Irving et al,12 which achieved a Harrell C of 0.79 to 0.86 for 10-year survival prediction of onset of psychosis from an index date.”

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. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Wainwright M. Statistical learning with sparsity: the lasso and generalizations. CRC Press; 2015:1-337. https://doi.org/10.1201/b18401 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Irving, J., Patel, R., Oliver, D., Colling, C., Pritchard, M., Broadbent, M., Baldwin, H., Stahl, D., Stewart, R., & Fusar-Poli, P.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Early Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-Detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
Venue
Schizophrenia Bulletin
Published
2020-10-07
Volume
47
Issue
2
Pages
405-414
ISSN
  • 0586-7614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-1701
OpenAlex
W3091781426
Cited by
92
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1
FWCI
6.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Health Data Research UK Fellowship (MR/S003118/1)
  • Starter Grant for Clinical Lecturers (SGL015/1020)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
Keywords
psychosis prediction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, London, Male, Middle Aged, Natural Language Processing, Psychotic Disorders, Retrospective Studies, Models, Statistical, Risk Assessment, Young Adult, 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