bioRxiv / medRxiv
open access
CC BY 4.0
Evaluating Clinical Concept Extraction and Evidence-Bounded Terminology Linking: Multisite Model Comparison and Pilot Ablation Study
BackgroundClinical terminology pipelines must first extract candidate spans from narrative notes and then determine whether those spans map to existing concepts or warrant further review. Evaluation is difficult because span boundaries vary between annotators and because downstream decisions depend
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- CTO: A Community-Based Clinical Trial Ontology and Its Applications in PubChemRDF and SCAIViewH#748609
- A review for navigating the trade-offs: evaluating open-source and proprietary large language models for clinical and biomedical information extraction.#14995
- Towards understanding the disease landscape of clinical trials in Germany: Ontology and embedding-based pipelines versus Large Language Models for ICD-10 Harmonization#651115
- Clinical Research Platform on Decision Making and Clinical Impact of Biomarker-Driven Precision Oncology#1141120
- Ontological Categorizations and Ontological Relativity in Biomedical Sciences. A Case Study#644217
Record · ID 1043964
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive