Paper detail

Closing the Gap: Joint De-Identification and Concept Extraction in the Clinical Domain

Exploiting natural language processing in the clinical domain requires de-identification, i.e., anonymization of personal information in texts. However, current research considers de-identification and downstream tasks, such as concept extraction, only in isolation and does not study the effects of de-identification on other tasks. In this paper, we close this gap by reporting concept extraction performance on automatically anonymized data and investigating joint models for de-identification and concept extraction. In particular, we propose a stacked model with restricted access to privacy-sensitive information and a multitask model. We set the new state of the art on benchmark datasets in English (96.1% F1 for de-identification and 88.9% F1 for concept extraction) and Spanish (91.4% F1 for concept extraction).

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.