Soo Bin Yoon, Jipyeong Lee, Hyung-Chul Lee, Chul-Woo Jung, Hyeonhoon Lee
{"title":"NLP 机器学习模型与人类医生在 ASA 身体状况分类方面的比较","authors":"Soo Bin Yoon, Jipyeong Lee, Hyung-Chul Lee, Chul-Woo Jung, Hyeonhoon Lee","doi":"10.1038/s41746-024-01259-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The American Society of Anesthesiologist’s Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification system assesses comorbidities before sedation and analgesia, but inconsistencies among raters have hindered its objective use. This study aimed to develop natural language processing (NLP) models to classify ASA-PS using pre-anesthesia evaluation summaries, comparing their performance to human physicians. Data from 717,389 surgical cases in a tertiary hospital (October 2004–May 2023) was split into training, tuning, and test datasets. Board-certified anesthesiologists created reference labels for tuning and test datasets. The NLP models, including ClinicalBigBird, BioClinicalBERT, and Generative Pretrained Transformer 4, were validated against anesthesiologists. The ClinicalBigBird model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.915. It outperformed board-certified anesthesiologists with a specificity of 0.901 vs. 0.897, precision of 0.732 vs. 0.715, and F1-score of 0.716 vs. 0.713 (all p <0.01). This approach will facilitate automatic and objective ASA-PS classification, thereby streamlining the clinical workflow.","PeriodicalId":19349,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Digital Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":12.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-024-01259-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of NLP machine learning models with human physicians for ASA Physical Status classification\",\"authors\":\"Soo Bin Yoon, Jipyeong Lee, Hyung-Chul Lee, Chul-Woo Jung, Hyeonhoon Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41746-024-01259-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The American Society of Anesthesiologist’s Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification system assesses comorbidities before sedation and analgesia, but inconsistencies among raters have hindered its objective use. This study aimed to develop natural language processing (NLP) models to classify ASA-PS using pre-anesthesia evaluation summaries, comparing their performance to human physicians. Data from 717,389 surgical cases in a tertiary hospital (October 2004–May 2023) was split into training, tuning, and test datasets. Board-certified anesthesiologists created reference labels for tuning and test datasets. The NLP models, including ClinicalBigBird, BioClinicalBERT, and Generative Pretrained Transformer 4, were validated against anesthesiologists. The ClinicalBigBird model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.915. It outperformed board-certified anesthesiologists with a specificity of 0.901 vs. 0.897, precision of 0.732 vs. 0.715, and F1-score of 0.716 vs. 0.713 (all p <0.01). This approach will facilitate automatic and objective ASA-PS classification, thereby streamlining the clinical workflow.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19349,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NPJ Digital Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-024-01259-6.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NPJ Digital Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-024-01259-6\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Digital Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-024-01259-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of NLP machine learning models with human physicians for ASA Physical Status classification
The American Society of Anesthesiologist’s Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification system assesses comorbidities before sedation and analgesia, but inconsistencies among raters have hindered its objective use. This study aimed to develop natural language processing (NLP) models to classify ASA-PS using pre-anesthesia evaluation summaries, comparing their performance to human physicians. Data from 717,389 surgical cases in a tertiary hospital (October 2004–May 2023) was split into training, tuning, and test datasets. Board-certified anesthesiologists created reference labels for tuning and test datasets. The NLP models, including ClinicalBigBird, BioClinicalBERT, and Generative Pretrained Transformer 4, were validated against anesthesiologists. The ClinicalBigBird model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.915. It outperformed board-certified anesthesiologists with a specificity of 0.901 vs. 0.897, precision of 0.732 vs. 0.715, and F1-score of 0.716 vs. 0.713 (all p <0.01). This approach will facilitate automatic and objective ASA-PS classification, thereby streamlining the clinical workflow.
期刊介绍:
npj Digital Medicine is an online open-access journal that focuses on publishing peer-reviewed research in the field of digital medicine. The journal covers various aspects of digital medicine, including the application and implementation of digital and mobile technologies in clinical settings, virtual healthcare, and the use of artificial intelligence and informatics.
The primary goal of the journal is to support innovation and the advancement of healthcare through the integration of new digital and mobile technologies. When determining if a manuscript is suitable for publication, the journal considers four important criteria: novelty, clinical relevance, scientific rigor, and digital innovation.