Paper detail

A Hybrid Citation Retrieval Algorithm for Evidence-based Clinical Knowledge Summarization: Combining Concept Extraction, Vector Similarity and Query Expansion for High Precision

Novel information retrieval methods to identify citations relevant to a clinical topic can overcome the knowledge gap existing between the primary literature (MEDLINE) and online clinical knowledge resources such as UpToDate. Searching the MEDLINE database directly or with query expansion methods returns a large number of citations that are not relevant to the query. The current study presents a citation retrieval system that retrieves citations for evidence-based clinical knowledge summarization. This approach combines query expansion, concept-based screening algorithm, and concept-based vector similarity. We also propose an information extraction framework for automated concept (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Disease) extraction. We evaluated our proposed system on all topics (as queries) available from UpToDate for two diseases, heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AFib). The system achieved an overall F-score of 41.2% on HF topics and 42.4% on AFib topics on a gold standard of citations available in UpToDate. This is significantly high when compared to a query-expansion based baseline (F-score of 1.3% on HF and 2.2% on AFib) and a system that uses query expansion with disease hyponyms and journal names, concept-based screening, and term-based vector similarity system (F-score of 37.5% on HF and 39.5% on AFib). Evaluating the system with top K relevant citations, where K is the number of citations in the gold standard achieved a much higher overall F-score of 69.9% on HF topics and 75.1% on AFib topics. In addition, the system retrieved up to 18 new relevant citations per topic when tested on ten HF and six AFib clinical topics.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.