ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2026
Clinical evaluation of MiADE: a natural language processing system for assisting structured diagnosis recording at the point of care.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the usability, usefulness and impact of a novel point of care natural language processing (NLP) system, Medical information AI Data Extractor (MiADE), to assist structured diagnosis recording in electronic health records.
methodsMixed methods evaluation of the implementation of MiADE in a major National Health Service hospital, with surveys, interviews and observed outpatient consultations. The number of structured diagnoses recorded per outpatient encounter was compared before and after MiADE, and completeness of inpatient problem lists was evaluated using billing diagnoses as a gold standard.
results85 clinicians consented to the study and were provided access to MiADE and 24 used MiADE to receive structured data suggestions during the study period. Baseline survey data and observations showed wide variation in structured data recording despite clinicians considering it to be important. Half of postimplementation survey respondents considered MiADE to be 'very' or 'moderately' useful. Multilevel quasi-Poisson regression of 12 309 outpatient encounters (accounting for time and clustering by clinician) estimated that the post-MiADE period was associated with 23.7% more diagnoses recorded per encounter. No improvement was seen in the inpatient setting. DISCUSSION: Structured recording of key information such as diagnoses using a clinical terminology is essential for safe, efficient patient care, but is currently done incompletely because it is time-consuming for clinicians. MiADE was associated with an increase in outpatient structured diagnosis recording despite low uptake of the tool.
conclusionPoint of care NLP using MiADE can potentially improve structured data recording, but further development and better clinician engagement are needed to maximise its impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN58300671.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.