ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Identifying anaphylaxis using weakly-supervised prediction models and natural language processing.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: Scalable computable phenotyping algorithms are critical for conducting high-throughput disease-outcome research in large, distributed-data electronic health record (EHR) and claims data settings. We developed and evaluated a claims- and EHR-based computable phenotyping algorithm for anaphylaxis, a rare acute condition that is challenging to accurately identify using claims data alone. Materials and Methods: Potential anaphylaxis events came from two healthcare systems (Kaiser Permanente Washington [KPWA] and Vanderbilt University Medical Center [VUMC]). We engineered features from clinical text using automated natural language processing (NLP) methods. We then developed a phenotyping algorithm using four NLP- and diagnosis code-based silver labels (proxies for the gold-standard labels). Gold-standard abstracted outcomes were used to evaluate algorithm performance. Results: The largest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.931 for an NLP-based silver-label model at KPWA. Depending on the model and healthcare system site, positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity at the threshold of predicted probability that maximized F1 score ranged from 0.52 to 0.77 (PPV) and 0.78 to 1 (sensitivity). Discussion: NLP-based silver-label models had large AUC at KPWA but not at VUMC. This may be because clinical text at KPWA is only available for outpatient encounters and secure messaging. High sensitivity for identifying anaphylaxis can be obtained using our best-performing models. Conclusion: The best-performing models had better PPV and sensitivity tradeoffs than prior bespoke anaphylaxis models with costly, manually curated features. The simplicity of the approach compared to traditional phenotyping methods allows it to be deployed easily at multiple health care systems.
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.