Matthew Stammers, Balasubramanian Ramgopal, Abigail Owusu Nimako, Anand Vyas, Reza Nouraei, Cheryl Metcalf, James Batchelor, Jonathan Shepherd, Markus Gwiggner
{"title":"A foundation systematic review of natural language processing applied to gastroenterology & hepatology.","authors":"Matthew Stammers, Balasubramanian Ramgopal, Abigail Owusu Nimako, Anand Vyas, Reza Nouraei, Cheryl Metcalf, James Batchelor, Jonathan Shepherd, Markus Gwiggner","doi":"10.1186/s12876-025-03608-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This review assesses the progress of NLP in gastroenterology to date, grades the robustness of the methodology, exposes the field to a new generation of authors, and highlights opportunities for future research.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Seven scholarly databases (ACM Digital Library, Arxiv, Embase, IEEE Explore, Pubmed, Scopus and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published between 2015 and 2023 that met the inclusion criteria. Studies lacking a description of appropriate validation or NLP methods were excluded, as were studies ufinavailable in English, those focused on non-gastrointestinal diseases and those that were duplicates. Two independent reviewers extracted study information, clinical/algorithm details, and relevant outcome data. Methodological quality and bias risks were appraised using a checklist of quality indicators for NLP studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-three studies were identified utilising NLP in endoscopy, inflammatory bowel disease, gastrointestinal bleeding, liver and pancreatic disease. Colonoscopy was the focus of 21 (38.9%) studies; 13 (24.1%) focused on liver disease, 7 (13.0%) on inflammatory bowel disease, 4 (7.4%) on gastroscopy, 4 (7.4%) on pancreatic disease and 2 (3.7%) on endoscopic sedation/ERCP and gastrointestinal bleeding. Only 30 (56.6%) of the studies reported patient demographics, and only 13 (24.5%) had a low risk of validation bias. Thirty-five (66%) studies mentioned generalisability, but only 5 (9.4%) mentioned explainability or shared code/models.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>NLP can unlock substantial clinical information from free-text notes stored in EPRs and is already being used, particularly to interpret colonoscopy and radiology reports. However, the models we have thus far lack transparency, leading to duplication, bias, and doubts about generalisability. Therefore, greater clinical engagement, collaboration, and open sharing of appropriate datasets and code are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":9129,"journal":{"name":"BMC Gastroenterology","volume":"25 1","pages":"58"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11800601/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-025-03608-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This review assesses the progress of NLP in gastroenterology to date, grades the robustness of the methodology, exposes the field to a new generation of authors, and highlights opportunities for future research.
Design: Seven scholarly databases (ACM Digital Library, Arxiv, Embase, IEEE Explore, Pubmed, Scopus and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published between 2015 and 2023 that met the inclusion criteria. Studies lacking a description of appropriate validation or NLP methods were excluded, as were studies ufinavailable in English, those focused on non-gastrointestinal diseases and those that were duplicates. Two independent reviewers extracted study information, clinical/algorithm details, and relevant outcome data. Methodological quality and bias risks were appraised using a checklist of quality indicators for NLP studies.
Results: Fifty-three studies were identified utilising NLP in endoscopy, inflammatory bowel disease, gastrointestinal bleeding, liver and pancreatic disease. Colonoscopy was the focus of 21 (38.9%) studies; 13 (24.1%) focused on liver disease, 7 (13.0%) on inflammatory bowel disease, 4 (7.4%) on gastroscopy, 4 (7.4%) on pancreatic disease and 2 (3.7%) on endoscopic sedation/ERCP and gastrointestinal bleeding. Only 30 (56.6%) of the studies reported patient demographics, and only 13 (24.5%) had a low risk of validation bias. Thirty-five (66%) studies mentioned generalisability, but only 5 (9.4%) mentioned explainability or shared code/models.
Conclusion: NLP can unlock substantial clinical information from free-text notes stored in EPRs and is already being used, particularly to interpret colonoscopy and radiology reports. However, the models we have thus far lack transparency, leading to duplication, bias, and doubts about generalisability. Therefore, greater clinical engagement, collaboration, and open sharing of appropriate datasets and code are needed.
目的:本综述评估了迄今为止NLP在胃肠病学中的进展,对方法的稳健性进行了评分,向新一代作者展示了该领域,并强调了未来研究的机会。设计:检索了7个学术数据库(ACM Digital Library、Arxiv、Embase、IEEE Explore、Pubmed、Scopus和b谷歌Scholar),检索了2015年至2023年间发表的符合纳入标准的研究。缺乏适当验证或NLP方法描述的研究被排除,无法获得英文版本的研究、专注于非胃肠道疾病的研究和重复研究也被排除。两名独立审稿人提取了研究信息、临床/算法细节和相关结果数据。使用NLP研究的质量指标清单评估方法学质量和偏倚风险。结果:53项研究确定了利用NLP在内窥镜检查、炎症性肠病、胃肠道出血、肝脏和胰腺疾病中的应用。结肠镜检查是21项(38.9%)研究的重点;13例(24.1%)专注于肝脏疾病,7例(13.0%)专注于炎症性肠病,4例(7.4%)专注于胃镜检查,4例(7.4%)专注于胰腺疾病,2例(3.7%)专注于内镜镇静/ERCP和胃肠道出血。只有30项(56.6%)研究报告了患者的人口统计学特征,只有13项(24.5%)研究具有低验证偏倚风险。35个(66%)研究提到了通用性,但只有5个(9.4%)提到了可解释性或共享代码/模型。结论:NLP可以从存储在epr中的自由文本笔记中解锁大量临床信息,并且已经被用于解释结肠镜检查和放射学报告。然而,到目前为止,我们所拥有的模型缺乏透明度,导致重复、偏见和对普遍性的怀疑。因此,需要更多的临床参与、协作和开放共享适当的数据集和代码。
期刊介绍:
BMC Gastroenterology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.