Zhou, Sicheng

Abstract Background Error analysis plays a crucial role in clinical concept extraction, a fundamental subtask within clinical natural language processing (NLP). The process typically involves a manual review of error types, such as contextual and linguistic factors contributing to their occurrence, and the identification of underlying causes to refine the NLP model and improve its performance. Conducting error analysis can be complex, requiring a combination of NLP expertise and domain-specific knowledge. Due to the high heterogeneity of electronic health record (EHR) settings across different institutions, challenges may arise when attempting to standardize and reproduce the error analysis process. Objectives This study aims to facilitate a collaborative effort to establish common definitions and taxonomies for capturing diverse error types, fostering community consensus on error analysis for clinical concept extraction tasks. Materials and Methods We iteratively developed and evaluated an error taxonomy based on existing literature, standards, real-world data, multisite case evaluations, and community feedback. The finalized taxonomy was released in both .dtd and .owl formats at the Open Health Natural Language Processing Consortium. The taxonomy is compatible with several different open-source annotation tools, including MAE, Brat, and MedTator. Results The resulting error taxonomy comprises 43 distinct error classes, organized into 6 error dimensions and 4 properties, including model type (symbolic and statistical machine learning), evaluation subject (model and human), evaluation level (patient, document, sentence, and concept), and annotation examples. Internal and external evaluations revealed strong variations in error types across methodological approaches, tasks, and EHR settings. Key points emerged from community feedback, including the need to enhancing clarity, generalizability, and usability of the taxonomy, along with dissemination strategies. Conclusion The proposed taxonomy can facilitate the acceleration and standardization of the error analysis process in multi-site settings, thus improving the provenance, interpretability, and portability of NLP models. Future researchers could explore the potential direction of developing automated or semi-automated methods to assist in the classification and standardization of error analysis.

Abstract Objective Transformer-based language models are prevailing in the clinical domain due to their excellent performance on clinical NLP tasks. The generalizability of those models is usually ignored during the model development process. This study evaluated the generalizability of CancerBERT, a Transformer-based clinical NLP model, along with classic machine learning models, i.e., conditional random field (CRF), bi-directional long short-term memory CRF (BiLSTM-CRF), across different clinical institutes through a breast cancer phenotype extraction task. Materials and methods Two clinical corpora of breast cancer patients were collected from the electronic health records from the University of Minnesota (UMN) and Mayo Clinic (MC), and annotated following the same guideline. We developed three types of NLP models (i.e., CRF, BiLSTM-CRF and CancerBERT) to extract cancer phenotypes from clinical texts. We evaluated the generalizability of models on different test sets with different learning strategies (model transfer vs locally trained). The entity coverage score was assessed with their association with the model performances. Results We manually annotated 200 and 161 clinical documents at UMN and MC. The corpora of the two institutes were found to have higher similarity between the target entities than the overall corpora. The CancerBERT models obtained the best performances among the independent test sets from two clinical institutes and the permutation test set. The CancerBERT model developed in one institute and further fine-tuned in another institute achieved reasonable performance compared to the model developed on local data (micro-F1: 0.925 vs 0.932). Conclusions The results indicate the CancerBERT model has superior learning ability and generalizability among the three types of clinical NLP models for our named entity recognition task. It has the advantage to recognize complex entities, e.g., entities with different labels.

Abstract Objective Accurate extraction of breast cancer patients’ phenotypes is important for clinical decision support and clinical research. This study developed and evaluated cancer domain pretrained CancerBERT models for extracting breast cancer phenotypes from clinical texts. We also investigated the effect of customized cancer-related vocabulary on the performance of CancerBERT models. Materials and Methods A cancer-related corpus of breast cancer patients was extracted from the electronic health records of a local hospital. We annotated named entities in 200 pathology reports and 50 clinical notes for 8 cancer phenotypes for fine-tuning and evaluation. We kept pretraining the BlueBERT model on the cancer corpus with expanded vocabularies (using both term frequency-based and manually reviewed methods) to obtain CancerBERT models. The CancerBERT models were evaluated and compared with other baseline models on the cancer phenotype extraction task. Results All CancerBERT models outperformed all other models on the cancer phenotyping NER task. Both CancerBERT models with customized vocabularies outperformed the CancerBERT with the original BERT vocabulary. The CancerBERT model with manually reviewed customized vocabulary achieved the best performance with macro F1 scores equal to 0.876 (95% CI, 0.873–0.879) and 0.904 (95% CI, 0.902–0.906) for exact match and lenient match, respectively. Conclusions The CancerBERT models were developed to extract the cancer phenotypes in clinical notes and pathology reports. The results validated that using customized vocabulary may further improve the performances of domain specific BERT models in clinical NLP tasks. The CancerBERT models developed in the study would further help clinical decision support.