Cited by 274Electronic Health Records SystemsMachine Learning in HealthcareBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies

Electronic health records-driven phenotyping: challenges, recent advances, and perspectives

Open access
Pathak, Jyotishman, Kho, Abel N, Denny, Joshua C·2013·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

With the completion of the Human Genome Project1 as well as recent advances in genomic science and comparative biological studies, a new era of individualized medicine is evolving where novel biomedical discoveries are leading to more effective prevention, treatment, and diagnosis of disease. Although altered phenotypes are one of the most reliable manifestations of altered gene functions, research in extracting, representing, and analyzing phenotype–genotype relationships is still evolving. This has led to the emergence of a trans-discipline field, called ‘Phenomics,’2 that aims to capitalize on high-throughput computation and informatics technologies for the systematic study of phenotypes and how they might influence personal genomics.3 Many comparative phenomics studies in the recent past4,5 have demonstrated the power of positively correlating phenotypes with several measures of gene functions. However, despite the advances, research in phenomics is presented with various challenges, including (i) developing approaches for high-throughput extraction and representation of phenotypes, (ii) building techniques for storing, integrating, and querying phenotype data, and (iii) advancing phenotypic-driven analysis to derive phenotype–genotype associations. A significant barrier in the discovery of new genetic variants is the requirement to obtain the large sample sizes needed for an effective study (since variants may be rare within a population) leading to time-consuming and onerous sample collection efforts. Electronic health records (EHRs) can accelerate clinical research and genomic medicine, but are hindered by the limited number of validated processes and tools to enable accurate and rapid phenotype extraction.6 EHRs are increasing in ubiquity, functionality, and comprehensiveness across the USA, in part due to Meaningful Use standards7 implemented as part of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act. One recent advance has been the coupling of DNA biorepositories to EHR data,8–13 combined with advances in informatics techniques, such as natural language processing (NLP), to enable genomic discoveries. The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE14,15) consortium—a network of nine academic medical centers—has demonstrated the effectiveness of EHR-derived phenotyping algorithms for cohort identification to conduct genome- and phenome-wide association studies.16–20 Algorithms to define phenotypes in eMERGE have typically followed an iterative path, and highlight the importance of intermittent chart review to validate phenotype accuracy, typically at more than one site (when a multisite implementation is planned16). Once finalized, eMERGE phenotype algorithms (as well as non-eMERGE algorithms) can be viewed at http://phekb.org. While eMERGE presents an exciting and encouraging demonstration of secondary use of EHR data, evaluating the strengths and limitations for EHRs has important implications for clinical and translational research, including clinical trials, observational cohorts, outcomes research, and comparative effectiveness research. These issues are further amplified within the realm of a learning healthcare system21 that emphasizes the ability to have real-time access to knowledge, digital capture of care experience, engaged and empowered patients, alignment of incentives to value, and a leadership-instilled culture of learning (figure 1). Hripcsak and Albers6 highlight several such challenges in leveraging EHRs for research, including data that is often incomplete, inaccurate, highly complex, and biased, and propose a combination of top-down knowledge engineering and bottom-up learning and analysis to address these issues (figure 2). Specifically, understanding the inherent complexity involved in a healthcare process model is critically important towards achieving a scalable and high-throughput phenotyping process. Different phases in a learning healthcare system (figure adapted with permission from Greene et al21). Electronic health record (EHR)-driven phenotyping and knowledge discovery (figure adapted with permission from Hripcsak and Albers6). Several have acknowledged that there is a recognized tension between facilitating data entry by allowing narrative text in EHRs, and utilizing these data for research.22 A key component for identifying patient cohorts in the EHR is to define inclusion and exclusion criteria that algorithmically select sets of patients based on stored clinical data. This process allows the definition of phenotypes over structured data (eg, demographics, diagnoses, medications, and laboratory measurements)23 as well as unstructured clinical text (eg, radiology reports,22,24 encounter notes, and discharge summaries25–30). In general, this process can be quite complex, involving heuristics encoded as rules or machine learning algorithms.31,32 Several NLP techniques33 have been developed specifically for clinical text, and includ

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 · 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002428

Cites

108 of 108 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?

  • Advancements in automated detection of SI, SB, and SA from clinical notes have shown varied success.

    “Advancements in automated detection of SI, SB, and SA from clinical notes have shown varied success17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26.”

    From Deep learning for identifying personal and family history of suicidal thoughts and behaviors from EHRs (2024) · cites this paper as [19]

    The main discussion describes automated extraction from clinical notes and notes challenges in achieving high accuracy; the Summary of Papers in the Special Issue also describes differing performance across phenotyping applications (page numbers unavailable). But our copy does not report detection results for suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior, or suicide attempts, so it does not support the claim’s specific application to SI, SB, and SA. (LLM, conf=0.81)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Prior automated approaches primarily focus on identifying suicidal tendencies without considering their temporal aspects, often conflating current and historical events.

    “These approaches, ranging from rule-based algorithms to ML techniques, primarily focus on identifying suicidal tendencies without considering their temporal aspects, often conflating current and historical events.”

    From Deep learning for identifying personal and family history of suicidal thoughts and behaviors from EHRs (2024) · cites this paper as [19]

    The paper’s discussion of EHR phenotyping describes rule-based and machine-learning approaches, supporting that part of the sentence. It does not discuss identifying suicidal tendencies or conflating current and historical suicidal events; instead, it explicitly lists temporal relations among the problems clinical NLP techniques address. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Traditional automated extraction of structured data elements from medical notes has relied on medical NLP using rule-based or machine-learning approaches or a combination of both.

    “Traditionally, the automated extraction of structured data elements from medical notes has relied on medical natural language processing (NLP) using rule-based or machine-learning approaches or a combination of both9,10.”

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. Wolf W, Doyle M, Aufox S, et al. DNA banking study in an ethnically diverse urban university hospital. Am J Hum Genet 2003;73:423.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pathak, J., Kho, A. N., & Denny, J. C.
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Corresponding author
Pathak, Jyotishman
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2013-12
Volume
20
Issue
e2
Pages
e206-e211
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W2151068025
Cited by
274
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 12
FWCI
32.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U19HL065962)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U01HG006379, U01HG006378, U01HG006388)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM105688, U19GM061388)
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01LM010685)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Keywords
electronic health records, phenotype extraction, genotype-phenotype correlation, natural language processing, cohort identification, rare variants, genomic medicine, meaningful use, HITECH Act, phenotype validation, clinical research informatics, phenomics, genome-wide association study, phenome-wide association study
MeSH terms
Academic Medical Centers, Algorithms, Humans, Phenotype, Genomics, Genetic Association 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