ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2021
Towards more patient friendly clinical notes through language models and ontologies.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Improving Clinical Documentation with Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review.Perspectives in health information management · 2024Pooled it
- A multi-metric evaluation of readability in psychiatric discharge summaries.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Clinical warrant in medical LLM evaluation.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- MedReadCtrl: Personalizing medical text generation with readability-controlled instruction learning.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- [Teaching Concept Hanover : Digitally integrated teaching for medical students at the University Clinic for Ophthalmology of the Hanover Medical School].Die Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- A framework for human evaluation of large language models in healthcare derived from literature review.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical notes are an efficient way to record patient information but are notoriously hard to decipher for non-experts. Automatically simplifying medical text can empower patients with valuable information about their health, while saving clinicians time. We present a novel approach to automated simplification of medical text based on word frequencies and language modelling, grounded on medical ontologies enriched with layman terms. We release a new dataset of pairs of publicly available medical sentences and a version of them simplified by clinicians. Also, we define a novel text simplification metric and evaluation framework, which we use to conduct a large-scale human evaluation of our method against the state of the art. Our method based on a language model trained on medical forum data generates simpler sentences while preserving both grammar and the original meaning, surpassing the current state of the art.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35308976PMC8861686What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.