English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background: Clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System (cTAKES) is an open-source natural language processing (NLP) system. In recent development modules of cTAKES, a negation detection (ND) algorithm is used to improve annotation capabilities and simplify automatic identification of negative context in large clinical documents. In this research, the two types of ND algorithms used are lexicon and syntax, which are analyzed using a database made openly available by the National Center for Biomedical Computing. The aim of this analysis is to find the pros and cons of these algorithms. Methods: Patient medical reports were collected from three institutions included the 2010 i2b2/VA Clinical NLP Challenge, which is the input data for this analysis. This database includes patient discharge summaries and progress notes. The patient data is fed into five ND algorithms: NegEx, ConText, pyConTextNLP, DEEPEN and Negation Resolution (NR). NegEx, ConText and pyConTextNLP are lexicon-based, whereas DEEPEN and NR are syntax-based. The results from these five ND algorithms are post-processed and compared with the annotated data. Finally, the performance of these ND algorithms is evaluated by computing standard measures including F-measure, kappa statistics and ROC, among others, as well as the execution time of each algorithm. Results: This research is tested through practical implementation based on the accuracy of each algorithm’s results and computational time to evaluate its performance in order to find a robust and reliable ND algorithm. Conclusions: The performance of the chosen ND algorithms is analyzed based on the results produced by this research approach. The time and accuracy of each algorithm are calculated and compared to suggest the best method.

Evaluation of lexicon- and syntax-based negation detection algorithms using clinical text data