The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Large-scale identification of patients with cerebral aneurysms using natural language processing
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To use natural language processing (NLP) in conjunction with the electronic medical record (EMR) to accurately identify patients with cerebral aneurysms and their matched controls. METHODS: ICD-9 and Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to obtain an initial data mart of potential aneurysm patients from the EMR. NLP was then used to train a classification algorithm with .632 bootstrap cross-validation used for correction of overfitting bias. The classification rule was then applied to the full data mart. Additional validation was performed on 300 patients classified as having aneurysms. Controls were obtained by matching age, sex, race, and healthcare use. RESULTS: We identified 55,675 patients of 4.2 million patients with ICD-9 and Current Procedural Terminology codes consistent with cerebral aneurysms. Of those, 16,823 patients had the term aneurysm occur near relevant anatomic terms. After training, a final algorithm consisting of 8 coded and 14 NLP variables was selected, yielding an overall area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.95. After the final algorithm was applied, 5,589 patients were classified as having aneurysms, and 54,952 controls were matched to those patients. The positive predictive value based on a validation cohort of 300 patients was 0.86. CONCLUSIONS: We harnessed the power of the EMR by applying NLP to obtain a large cohort of patients with intracranial aneurysms and their matched controls. Such algorithms can be generalized to other diseases for epidemiologic and genetic studies.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“The resulting variables are successfully used for classifying the normal patients and the patients with cerebral, with 95% and 86% accuracy rates on the training and validation samples, respectively.”
From Artificial intelligence in healthcare: past, present and future (2017) · cites this paper as [45]
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, the NLP pipelines can help with disease diagnosis.”
From Artificial intelligence in healthcare: past, present and future (2017) · cites this paper as [45]
In the citing paper
“Castro et al identified 14 cerebral aneurysms disease-associated variables through implementing NLP on the clinical notes.45”
From Artificial intelligence in healthcare: past, present and future (2017) · cites this paper as [45]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 18 · Cited by 98
Metadata
- Authors
- Castro, V. M., Dligach, D., Finan, S., Yu, S., Can, A., Abd-El-Barr, M., Gainer, V., Shadick, N. A., Murphy, S., Cai, T., Savova, G., Weiss, S. T., & Du, R.
- Affiliations
- Boston Children's Hospital (US)
- From Research Information Systems and Computing (V.M.C., V.G., S.M.), Partners Healthcare; Boston Children's Hospital Informatics Program (D.D., S.F., G.S.); Harvard Medical School (D.D., S.Y., A.C., M.A.-E.-B., N.A.S., S.M., S.T.W., R.D.); Department of Medicine (S.Y., S.T.W.), Department of Neurosurgery (A.C., M.A.-E.-B., R.D.), Division of Rheumatology, Immunology and Allergy (N.A.S.), and Channing Division of Network Medicine (S.T.W., R.D.), Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Center for...
- ORCID
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 2017-01-10
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 164-168
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- PMC
- PMC5224711
- OpenAlex
- W2560569441
- Cited by
- 98
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 13
- FWCI
- 9.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Neurology (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Human Genome Research Institute (U54HG007963)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Intracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
- Keywords
- intracranial aneurysm, natural language processing, electronic health records, patient identification, matched controls, ICD-9 codes, CPT codes, machine learning classifiers, positive predictive value
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Algorithms, Intracranial Aneurysm, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Natural Language Processing, Retrospective Studies, Case-Control Studies, Area Under Curve, International Classification of Diseases, 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