AI Article Synopsis

  • * A study used word embedding techniques like Word2Vec, FastText, and GloVe to analyze medical abstracts, focusing on diseases related to the term "infarction" and comparing the findings with ICD-10 codes for accuracy.
  • * Results indicated that while internal validity (measured by cophenetic correlation coefficient or CCC) and external validity (measures like adjusted mutual information or AMI) used different metrics for optimal results, the use of cosine distance was recommended for better similarity evaluations among diseases.

Article Abstract

Background: The pivot and cluster strategy (PCS) is a diagnostic reasoning strategy that automatically elicits disease clusters similar to a differential diagnosis in a batch. Although physicians know empirically which disease clusters are similar, there has been no quantitative evaluation. This study aimed to determine whether inter-disease distances between word embedding vectors using the PCS are a valid quantitative representation of similar disease groups in a limited domain.

Methods: Abstracts were extracted from the Ichushi Web database and subjected to morphological analysis and training using Word2Vec, FastText, and GloVe. Consequently, word embedding vectors were obtained. For words including "infarction," we calculated the cophenetic correlation coefficient (CCC) as an internal validity measure and the adjusted rand index (ARI), normalized mutual information (NMI), and adjusted mutual information (AMI) with ICD-10 codes as the external validity measures. This was performed for each combination of metric and hierarchical clustering method.

Results: Seventy-one words included "infarction," of which 38 diseases matched the ICD-10 standard with the appearance of 21 unique ICD-10 codes. When using Word2Vec, the CCC was most significant at 0.8690 (metric and method: euclidean and centroid), whereas the AMI was maximal at 0.4109 (metric and method: cosine and correlation, and average and weighted). The NMI and ARI were maximal at 0.8463 and 0.3593, respectively (metric and method: cosine and complete). FastText and GloVe generally resulted in the same trend as Word2Vec, and the metric and method that maximized CCC differed from the ones that maximized the external validity measures.

Conclusions: The metric and method that maximized the internal validity measure differed from those that maximized the external validity measures; both produced different results. The cosine distance should be used when considering ICD-10, and the Euclidean distance when considering the frequency of word occurrence. The distributed representation, when trained by Word2Vec on the "infarction" domain from a Japanese academic corpus, provides an objective inter-disease distance used in PCS.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9730570PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-02061-8DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

metric method
20
word embedding
12
external validity
12
disease clusters
8
embedding vectors
8
fasttext glove
8
internal validity
8
validity measure
8
icd-10 codes
8
validity measures
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!