Skip to content
Open access

A machine-assisted framework for systematic error analysis in clinical concept extraction

Aug 2026 · Nature Communications · Vol 17 · 1 citation · 32 references
Medicine

TL;DR

MedError, a machine-assisted, human-in-the-loop framework, improves the standardization, validity, and efficiency of clinical NLP error analysis, supporting more transparent and trustworthy model deployment.

Abstract

Error analysis is critical for evaluating and improving clinical natural language processing (NLP) models, yet no standardized framework exists to support systematic error analysis for clinical concept extraction. Here we present MedError, a machine-assisted, human-in-the-loop framework integrating a validated error taxonomy, large language model (LLM)-assisted classification, and a structured annotation workflow. MedError is developed from 1187 unique errors manually curated from 4227 clinical notes across three institutions, spanning 25 error types and 48 clinical concept categories. Here we show that MedError supports both single-site and federated multisite error analysis through three complementary evaluations. First, benchmarking of six proprietary and open-source LLMs shows that automated error classification alone is insufficient without human involvement. Second, MedError-derived error feedback improves NLP extraction performance by 34–62% over an unstructured baseline across 11 cognitive status concepts. Third, prospective external validation at two independent institutions demonstrates improved agreement with expert-adjudicated annotations by up to 30% (McNemar exact test, p = 0.035, φ = 0.38) and reduced annotation time by 26–33%, providing a systematic and practical framework for real-world clinical NLP deployment. MedError, a machine-assisted human-in-the-loop framework, improves the standardization, validity, and efficiency of clinical NLP error analysis, supporting more transparent and trustworthy model deployment.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Aug 2026

REFINE: Closing the Loop Between Large Language Models and Symbolic Rules in Clinical NLP

This study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can assist in identifying extraction errors and generating candidate rules to improve symbolic clinical NLP systems and suggests that LLMs can support scalable rule refinement for symbolic clinical NLP systems.

N. Wang, A. Kakadiaris, C. Li et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Developing an open-source framework for LLM evaluation of patients using EHR clinical documentation; performance of LLMs relative to medical professionals

Current LLMs do not achieve inter-rater reliability levels comparable to medical professionals in clinical information extraction from ENT documentation, suggesting they are best suited for initial extraction with human verification rather than autonomous operation.

L. Barrett, N. Joshi, A. S. North et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Evaluating Clinical Concept Extraction and Evidence-Bounded Terminology Linking: Multisite Model Comparison and Pilot Ablation Study

Measured extraction performance varied substantially by matching definition, whereas exact-link decisions varied with the availability of matched terminology evidence, support separate evaluation of extraction, retrieval, evidence-grounded linking, and extension candidacy.

Y. Chen, M. Popescu · 0 citations
Review Sep 2026

Automated Classification of Radiation Oncology Safety Events Using Large Language Models: A Novel Approach to Streamline Reporting and Enable Retrospective Analysis.

This is the first study to apply an LLM for automated classification of radiation oncology safety events and to outline a framework for future reporting systems that leverage artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted workflows, demonstrating strong potential for automating retrospective safety event tagging and streamlinin...

Qiong-Ge Li, Jian Liu, Xing Li et al. · 0 citations
#software testing Review Open access Aug 2026

Cutting chart-review time and improving database accuracy in inflammatory bowel disease with human-in-the-loop large language models

An open-source, human-verified workflow using large language models can accelerate electronic health record abstraction while improving accuracy and supports broader adoption of transparent artificial intelligence methods in clinical research.

Carl Jannes Neuse, Malte Janssen, S. Ibing et al. · 0 citations

EviStreams: Human-in-the-Loop AI Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews in Medicine

Systematic reviews underpin clinical guidelines, yet their data-extraction step is a major expert-labor bottleneck bound by a protocolized workflow: two reviewers extract each study independently, an adjudicator resolves disagreements, and the team keeps an auditable record of how every value was produced. Large langua...

S. Kosuri, A. Bhosale, M. Glick et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.