Researcher profile

Andrew Fano

Andrew Fano contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Identifying causal relations in tweets using deep learning: Use case on diabetes-related tweets from 2017-2021

Objective: Leveraging machine learning methods, we aim to extract both explicit and implicit cause-effect associations in patient-reported, diabetes-related tweets and provide a tool to better understand opinion, feelings and observations shared within the diabetes online community from a causality perspective. Materials and Methods: More than 30 million diabetes-related tweets in English were collected between April 2017 and January 2021. Deep learning and natural language processing methods were applied to focus on tweets with personal and emotional content. A cause-effect-tweet dataset was manually labeled and used to train 1) a fine-tuned Bertweet model to detect causal sentences containing a causal association 2) a CRF model with BERT based features to extract possible cause-effect associations. Causes and effects were clustered in a semi-supervised approach and visualised in an interactive cause-effect-network. Results: Causal sentences were detected with a recall of 68% in an imbalanced dataset. A CRF model with BERT based features outperformed a fine-tuned BERT model for cause-effect detection with a macro recall of 68%. This led to 96,676 sentences with cause-effect associations. "Diabetes" was identified as the central cluster followed by "Death" and "Insulin". Insulin pricing related causes were frequently associated with "Death". Conclusions: A novel methodology was developed to detect causal sentences and identify both explicit and implicit, single and multi-word cause and corresponding effect as expressed in diabetes-related tweets leveraging BERT-based architectures and visualised as cause-effect-network. Extracting causal associations on real-life, patient reported outcomes in social media data provides a useful complementary source of information in diabetes research.

preprint2022arXiv

MIMICause: Representation and automatic extraction of causal relation types from clinical notes

Understanding causal narratives communicated in clinical notes can help make strides towards personalized healthcare. Extracted causal information from clinical notes can be combined with structured EHR data such as patients' demographics, diagnoses, and medications. This will enhance healthcare providers' ability to identify aspects of a patient's story communicated in the clinical notes and help make more informed decisions. In this work, we propose annotation guidelines, develop an annotated corpus and provide baseline scores to identify types and direction of causal relations between a pair of biomedical concepts in clinical notes; communicated implicitly or explicitly, identified either in a single sentence or across multiple sentences. We annotate a total of 2714 de-identified examples sampled from the 2018 n2c2 shared task dataset and train four different language model based architectures. Annotation based on our guidelines achieved a high inter-annotator agreement i.e. Fleiss' kappa ($κ$) score of 0.72, and our model for identification of causal relations achieved a macro F1 score of 0.56 on the test data. The high inter-annotator agreement for clinical text shows the quality of our annotation guidelines while the provided baseline F1 score sets the direction for future research towards understanding narratives in clinical texts.