RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Inter-Rater Agreement for the Annotation of Neurologic Concepts in Electronic Health Records
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.11.16.22282384
DO 10.1101/2022.11.16.22282384
A1 Oommen, Chelsea
A1 Howlett-Prieto, Quentin
A1 Carrithers, Michael D.
A1 Hier, Daniel B.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/11/18/2022.11.16.22282384.abstract
AB The extraction of patient signs and symptoms recorded as free text in electronic health records is critical for precision medicine. Once extracted, signs and symptoms can be made computable by mapping to clinical concepts in an ontology. Extracting clinical concepts from free text is tedious and time-consuming. Prior studies have suggested that inter-rater agreement for clinical concept extraction is low. We have examined inter-rater agreement for annotating neurologic concepts in clinical notes from electronic health records. After training on the annotation process, the annotation tool, and the supporting neuro-ontology, three raters annotated 15 clinical notes in three rounds. Inter-rater agreement between the three annotators was high for text span and category label. A machine annotator based on a convolutional neural network had a high level of agreement with the human annotators, but one that was lower than human inter-rater agreement. We conclude that high levels of agreement between human annotators are possible with appropriate training and annotation tools. Furthermore, more training examples combined with improvements in neural networks and natural language processing should make machine annotators capable of high throughput automated clinical concept extraction with high levels of agreement with human annotators.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementMDC acknowledges research funding from the Department of Veterans Affairs (BLR\&D Merit Award BX000467) and prior support from Biogen.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Human Studies approved by the Institutional Review Board, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago IL 60612.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors