Automated categorisation of clinical incident reports using statistical text classification
ObjectivesTo explore the feasibility of using statistical text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports.MethodsStatistical text classifiers based on Naïve Bayes and Support Vector Machine algorithms were trained and tested on incident reports submitted by publi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BMJ quality & safety 2010-12, Vol.19 (6), p.e55-e55 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | e55 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | e55 |
container_title | BMJ quality & safety |
container_volume | 19 |
creator | Ong, Mei-Sing Magrabi, Farah Coiera, Enrico |
description | ObjectivesTo explore the feasibility of using statistical text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports.MethodsStatistical text classifiers based on Naïve Bayes and Support Vector Machine algorithms were trained and tested on incident reports submitted by public hospitals to identify two classes of clinical incidents: inadequate clinical handover and incorrect patient identification. Each classifier was trained on 600 reports (300 positives, 300 negatives), and tested on 372 reports (248 positives, 124 negatives). The results were evaluated using standard measures of accuracy, precision, recall, F-measure and area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Classifier learning rates were also evaluated, using classifier accuracy against training set size.ResultsAll classifiers performed well in categorising clinical handover and patient identification incidents. Naïve Bayes attained the best performance on handover incidents, correctly identifying 86.29% of reporter-classified incidents (precision=0.84, recall=0.90, F-measure=0.87, AUC=0.93) and 91.53% of expert-classified incidents (precision=0.87, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.92, AUC=0.97). For patient identification incidents, the best results were obtained when Support Vector Machine with radial-basis function kernel was used to classify reporter-classified reports (accuracy=97.98%, precision=0.98, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.98, AUC=1.00); and when Naïve Bayes was used on expert-classified reports (accuracy=95.97%, precision=0.95, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.96, AUC=0.99). A relatively small training set was found to be adequate, with most classifiers achieving an accuracy above 80% when the training set size was as small as 100 samples.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of using text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1136/qshc.2009.036657 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_815966717</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>815966717</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b442t-e3d5f0f92ef126bf6d5a6d5765bbf4d876915010d44b9763e24d98f7d419938b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUtPHSEYholpo1bdu2om6aKLZo7cL0tzYi9G7aZ20wVhBrCczgxHYBL77-V01IWbLoAv8Lwf5AGAUwRXCBF-dp9_9ysMoVpBwjkTe-AQUcFaoiB681xLJQ_Au5w3ECKFFdoHBxgKTInCh-DX-VziaIqzTV_nu5hCNiXEqYm-6Ycwhd4MTZj6YN1UmuS2MZXczDlMd00uFc3lH1LcQ6kBk3PwdWPX4hi89WbI7uRpPQK3ny9-rL-2V9-_fFufX7Udpbi0jljmoVfYeYR557llpg7BWdd5aqXgCjGIoKW0U4ITh6lV0gtLkVJEduQIfFz6blO8n10uegy5d8NgJhfnrCViinOBRCU_vCI3cU5TfZxGQkiJmZKwUnCh-hRzTs7rbQqjSX81gnrnXe-86513vXivkfdPjedudPYl8Cy6Au0CVF_u4eXcpD-aCyKYvvm5rvQlvK5fp1nlPy18N27-f_0jyRmbvg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1778825980</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Automated categorisation of clinical incident reports using statistical text classification</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><creator>Ong, Mei-Sing ; Magrabi, Farah ; Coiera, Enrico</creator><creatorcontrib>Ong, Mei-Sing ; Magrabi, Farah ; Coiera, Enrico</creatorcontrib><description>ObjectivesTo explore the feasibility of using statistical text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports.MethodsStatistical text classifiers based on Naïve Bayes and Support Vector Machine algorithms were trained and tested on incident reports submitted by public hospitals to identify two classes of clinical incidents: inadequate clinical handover and incorrect patient identification. Each classifier was trained on 600 reports (300 positives, 300 negatives), and tested on 372 reports (248 positives, 124 negatives). The results were evaluated using standard measures of accuracy, precision, recall, F-measure and area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Classifier learning rates were also evaluated, using classifier accuracy against training set size.ResultsAll classifiers performed well in categorising clinical handover and patient identification incidents. Naïve Bayes attained the best performance on handover incidents, correctly identifying 86.29% of reporter-classified incidents (precision=0.84, recall=0.90, F-measure=0.87, AUC=0.93) and 91.53% of expert-classified incidents (precision=0.87, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.92, AUC=0.97). For patient identification incidents, the best results were obtained when Support Vector Machine with radial-basis function kernel was used to classify reporter-classified reports (accuracy=97.98%, precision=0.98, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.98, AUC=1.00); and when Naïve Bayes was used on expert-classified reports (accuracy=95.97%, precision=0.95, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.96, AUC=0.99). A relatively small training set was found to be adequate, with most classifiers achieving an accuracy above 80% when the training set size was as small as 100 samples.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of using text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1475-3898</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2044-5415</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-3901</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2044-5423</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2009.036657</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20724392</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</publisher><subject>adverse event ; Aeronautics ; Ambulatory care ; Artificial intelligence ; Automation ; Classification ; Classification - methods ; Emergency medical care ; Feasibility Studies ; Health administration ; Humans ; Identification ; Incident reporting ; Knowledge management ; machine learning ; Medical Errors - classification ; Medical Errors - statistics & numerical data ; Medicine ; Natural Language Processing ; Patient safety ; text classification</subject><ispartof>BMJ quality & safety, 2010-12, Vol.19 (6), p.e55-e55</ispartof><rights>2010, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><rights>2010 2010, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b442t-e3d5f0f92ef126bf6d5a6d5765bbf4d876915010d44b9763e24d98f7d419938b3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/19/6/e55.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/19/6/e55.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,314,776,780,3183,23550,27901,27902,77569,77600</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20724392$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ong, Mei-Sing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magrabi, Farah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coiera, Enrico</creatorcontrib><title>Automated categorisation of clinical incident reports using statistical text classification</title><title>BMJ quality & safety</title><addtitle>Qual Saf Health Care</addtitle><description>ObjectivesTo explore the feasibility of using statistical text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports.MethodsStatistical text classifiers based on Naïve Bayes and Support Vector Machine algorithms were trained and tested on incident reports submitted by public hospitals to identify two classes of clinical incidents: inadequate clinical handover and incorrect patient identification. Each classifier was trained on 600 reports (300 positives, 300 negatives), and tested on 372 reports (248 positives, 124 negatives). The results were evaluated using standard measures of accuracy, precision, recall, F-measure and area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Classifier learning rates were also evaluated, using classifier accuracy against training set size.ResultsAll classifiers performed well in categorising clinical handover and patient identification incidents. Naïve Bayes attained the best performance on handover incidents, correctly identifying 86.29% of reporter-classified incidents (precision=0.84, recall=0.90, F-measure=0.87, AUC=0.93) and 91.53% of expert-classified incidents (precision=0.87, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.92, AUC=0.97). For patient identification incidents, the best results were obtained when Support Vector Machine with radial-basis function kernel was used to classify reporter-classified reports (accuracy=97.98%, precision=0.98, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.98, AUC=1.00); and when Naïve Bayes was used on expert-classified reports (accuracy=95.97%, precision=0.95, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.96, AUC=0.99). A relatively small training set was found to be adequate, with most classifiers achieving an accuracy above 80% when the training set size was as small as 100 samples.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of using text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports.</description><subject>adverse event</subject><subject>Aeronautics</subject><subject>Ambulatory care</subject><subject>Artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Classification - methods</subject><subject>Emergency medical care</subject><subject>Feasibility Studies</subject><subject>Health administration</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Identification</subject><subject>Incident reporting</subject><subject>Knowledge management</subject><subject>machine learning</subject><subject>Medical Errors - classification</subject><subject>Medical Errors - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Natural Language Processing</subject><subject>Patient safety</subject><subject>text classification</subject><issn>1475-3898</issn><issn>2044-5415</issn><issn>1475-3901</issn><issn>2044-5423</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUtPHSEYholpo1bdu2om6aKLZo7cL0tzYi9G7aZ20wVhBrCczgxHYBL77-V01IWbLoAv8Lwf5AGAUwRXCBF-dp9_9ysMoVpBwjkTe-AQUcFaoiB681xLJQ_Au5w3ECKFFdoHBxgKTInCh-DX-VziaIqzTV_nu5hCNiXEqYm-6Ycwhd4MTZj6YN1UmuS2MZXczDlMd00uFc3lH1LcQ6kBk3PwdWPX4hi89WbI7uRpPQK3ny9-rL-2V9-_fFufX7Udpbi0jljmoVfYeYR557llpg7BWdd5aqXgCjGIoKW0U4ITh6lV0gtLkVJEduQIfFz6blO8n10uegy5d8NgJhfnrCViinOBRCU_vCI3cU5TfZxGQkiJmZKwUnCh-hRzTs7rbQqjSX81gnrnXe-86513vXivkfdPjedudPYl8Cy6Au0CVF_u4eXcpD-aCyKYvvm5rvQlvK5fp1nlPy18N27-f_0jyRmbvg</recordid><startdate>201012</startdate><enddate>201012</enddate><creator>Ong, Mei-Sing</creator><creator>Magrabi, Farah</creator><creator>Coiera, Enrico</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201012</creationdate><title>Automated categorisation of clinical incident reports using statistical text classification</title><author>Ong, Mei-Sing ; Magrabi, Farah ; Coiera, Enrico</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b442t-e3d5f0f92ef126bf6d5a6d5765bbf4d876915010d44b9763e24d98f7d419938b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>adverse event</topic><topic>Aeronautics</topic><topic>Ambulatory care</topic><topic>Artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Classification - methods</topic><topic>Emergency medical care</topic><topic>Feasibility Studies</topic><topic>Health administration</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Identification</topic><topic>Incident reporting</topic><topic>Knowledge management</topic><topic>machine learning</topic><topic>Medical Errors - classification</topic><topic>Medical Errors - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Natural Language Processing</topic><topic>Patient safety</topic><topic>text classification</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ong, Mei-Sing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magrabi, Farah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coiera, Enrico</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>BMJ quality & safety</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ong, Mei-Sing</au><au>Magrabi, Farah</au><au>Coiera, Enrico</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Automated categorisation of clinical incident reports using statistical text classification</atitle><jtitle>BMJ quality & safety</jtitle><addtitle>Qual Saf Health Care</addtitle><date>2010-12</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>e55</spage><epage>e55</epage><pages>e55-e55</pages><issn>1475-3898</issn><issn>2044-5415</issn><eissn>1475-3901</eissn><eissn>2044-5423</eissn><abstract>ObjectivesTo explore the feasibility of using statistical text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports.MethodsStatistical text classifiers based on Naïve Bayes and Support Vector Machine algorithms were trained and tested on incident reports submitted by public hospitals to identify two classes of clinical incidents: inadequate clinical handover and incorrect patient identification. Each classifier was trained on 600 reports (300 positives, 300 negatives), and tested on 372 reports (248 positives, 124 negatives). The results were evaluated using standard measures of accuracy, precision, recall, F-measure and area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Classifier learning rates were also evaluated, using classifier accuracy against training set size.ResultsAll classifiers performed well in categorising clinical handover and patient identification incidents. Naïve Bayes attained the best performance on handover incidents, correctly identifying 86.29% of reporter-classified incidents (precision=0.84, recall=0.90, F-measure=0.87, AUC=0.93) and 91.53% of expert-classified incidents (precision=0.87, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.92, AUC=0.97). For patient identification incidents, the best results were obtained when Support Vector Machine with radial-basis function kernel was used to classify reporter-classified reports (accuracy=97.98%, precision=0.98, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.98, AUC=1.00); and when Naïve Bayes was used on expert-classified reports (accuracy=95.97%, precision=0.95, recall=0.98, F-measure=0.96, AUC=0.99). A relatively small training set was found to be adequate, with most classifiers achieving an accuracy above 80% when the training set size was as small as 100 samples.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of using text classification techniques to automatically categorise clinical incident reports.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</pub><pmid>20724392</pmid><doi>10.1136/qshc.2009.036657</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1475-3898 |
ispartof | BMJ quality & safety, 2010-12, Vol.19 (6), p.e55-e55 |
issn | 1475-3898 2044-5415 1475-3901 2044-5423 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_815966717 |
source | MEDLINE; BMJ Journals - NESLi2 |
subjects | adverse event Aeronautics Ambulatory care Artificial intelligence Automation Classification Classification - methods Emergency medical care Feasibility Studies Health administration Humans Identification Incident reporting Knowledge management machine learning Medical Errors - classification Medical Errors - statistics & numerical data Medicine Natural Language Processing Patient safety text classification |
title | Automated categorisation of clinical incident reports using statistical text classification |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-18T22%3A50%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Automated%20categorisation%20of%20clinical%20incident%20reports%20using%20statistical%20text%20classification&rft.jtitle=BMJ%20quality%20&%20safety&rft.au=Ong,%20Mei-Sing&rft.date=2010-12&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=e55&rft.epage=e55&rft.pages=e55-e55&rft.issn=1475-3898&rft.eissn=1475-3901&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/qshc.2009.036657&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E815966717%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1778825980&rft_id=info:pmid/20724392&rfr_iscdi=true |