Improving the evidence-based clinical decision-making process: Interactive classification and topic discovery on diabetes-related biomedical literature (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Ahne ◽  
Guy Fagherazzi ◽  
Xavier Tannier ◽  
Thomas Czernichow ◽  
Francisco Orchard

BACKGROUND The amount of available textual health data such as scientific and biomedical literature is constantly growing and it becomes more and more challenging for health professionals to properly summarise those data and in consequence to practice evidence-based clinical decision making. Moreover, the exploration of large unstructured health text data is very challenging for non experts due to limited time, resources and skills. Current tools to explore text data lack ease of use, need high computation efforts and have difficulties to incorporate domain knowledge and focus on topics of interest. OBJECTIVE We developed a methodology which is able to explore and target topics of interest via an interactive user interface for experts and non-experts. We aim to reach near state of the art performance, while reducing memory consumption, increasing scalability and minimizing user interaction effort to improve the clinical decision making process. The performance is evaluated on diabetes-related abstracts from Pubmed. METHODS The methodology consists of four parts: 1) A novel interpretable hierarchical clustering of documents where each node is defined by headwords (describe documents in this node the most); 2) An efficient classification system to target topics; 3) Minimized users interaction effort through active learning; 4) A visual user interface through which a user interacts. We evaluated our approach on 50,911 diabetes-related abstracts from Pubmed which provide a hierarchical Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) structure, a unique identifier for a topic. Hierarchical clustering performance was compared against the implementation in the machine learning library scikit-learn. On a subset of 2000 randomly chosen diabetes abstracts, our active learning strategy was compared against three other strategies: random selection of training instances, uncertainty sampling which chooses instances the model is most uncertain about and an expected gradient length strategy based on convolutional neural networks (CNN). RESULTS For the hierarchical clustering performance, we achieved a F1-Score of 0.73 compared to scikit-learn’s of 0.76. Concerning active learning performance, after 200 chosen training samples based on these strategies, the weighted F1-Score over all MeSH codes resulted in satisfying 0.62 F1-Score of our approach, compared to 0.61 of the uncertainty strategy, 0.61 the CNN and 0.45 the random strategy. Moreover, our methodology showed a constant low memory use with increased number of documents but increased execution time. CONCLUSIONS We proposed an easy to use tool for experts and non-experts being able to combine domain knowledge with topic exploration and target specific topics of interest while improving transparency. Furthermore our approach is very memory efficient and highly parallelizable making it interesting for large Big Data sets. This approach can be used by health professionals to rapidly get deep insights into biomedical literature to ultimately improve the evidence-based clinical decision making process.

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cláudio Rodrigues Leles ◽  
Maria do Carmo Matias Freire

A critical problem in the decision making process for dental prosthodontic treatment is the lack of reliable clinical parameters. This review discusses the limits of traditional normative treatment and presents guidelines for clinical decision making. There is a need to incorporate a sociodental approach to help determine patient's needs. Adoption of the evidence-based clinical practice model is also needed to assure safe and effective clinical practice in prosthetic dentistry.


Electronics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 1364
Author(s):  
Beomjoo Park ◽  
Muhammad Afzal ◽  
Jamil Hussain ◽  
Asim Abbas ◽  
Sungyoung Lee

To support evidence-based precision medicine and clinical decision-making, we need to identify accurate, appropriate, and clinically relevant studies from voluminous biomedical literature. To address the issue of accurate identification of high impact relevant articles, we propose a novel approach of attention-based deep learning for finding and ranking relevant studies against a topic of interest. For learning the proposed model, we collect data consisting of 240,324 clinical articles from the 2018 Precision Medicine track in Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) to identify and rank relevant documents matched with the user query. We built a BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers) based classification model to classify high and low impact articles. We contextualized word embedding to create vectors of the documents, and user queries combined with genetic information to find contextual similarity for determining the relevancy score to rank the articles. We compare our proposed model results with existing approaches and obtain a higher accuracy of 95.44% as compared to 94.57% (the next best performer) and get a higher precision by about 14% at P@5 (precision at 5) and about 12% at P@10 (precision at 10). The contextually viable and competitive outcomes of the proposed model confirm the suitability of our proposed model for use in domains like evidence-based precision medicine.


2002 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Maree Keenan ◽  
Anthony C. Redmond

This paper is the first in a series of three aimed at introducing clinicians to current concepts in research, and outlining how they may be able to apply these concepts to their own clinical practice. It has become evident in recent years that while many practitioners may not want to become actively involved in the research process, simply keeping abreast of the burgeoning publication base will create new demands on their time, and will often require the acquisition of new skills. This series introduces the philosophies of integrating what sometimes may appear to be abstract research into the realities of the clinical environment. It will provide practitioners with an accessible summary of the tools required in order to understand the research process. For some, it is hoped this series may provide some impetus for the contemplative practitioner to become a more active participant in the research process. This first paper addresses how the evidence based practice (EBP) revolution can be used to empower the individual practitioner and how good quality evidence can improve the overall clinical decision making process. It also suggests key strategies by which the clinician may try to enhance their clinical decision making process and make research evidence more applicable to their day to day clinical practice. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 92(2): 115-122, 2002)


2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.


2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristi J. Stinson

Completed as part of a larger dissertational study, the purpose of this portion of this descriptive correlational study was to examine the relationships among registered nurses’ clinical experiences and clinical decision-making processes in the critical care environment. The results indicated that there is no strong correlation between clinical experience in general and clinical experience in critical care and clinical decision-making. There were no differences found in any of the Benner stages of clinical experience in relation to the overall clinical decision-making process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document