Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Overview of the CLEF eHealth evaluation lab 2015

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Goeuriot, Lorraine
Liadh, Kelly
Suominen, Hanna
Hanlen, Leif
Neveol, Aurelie
Grouin, Cyril
Palotti, Joao
Zuccon, Guido

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Springer International Publishing Switzerland

Abstract

This paper reports on the 3rd CLEFeHealth evaluation lab, which continues our evaluation resource building activities for the medical domain. In this edition of the lab, we focus on easing patients and nurses in authoring, understanding, and accessing eHealth information. The 2015 CLEFeHealth evaluation lab was structured into two tasks, focusing on evaluating methods for information extraction (IE) and information retrieval (IR). The IE task introduced two new challenges. Task 1a focused on clinical speech recognition of nursing handover notes; Task 1b focused on clinical named entity recognition in languages other than English, specifically French. Task 2 focused on the retrieval of health information to answer queries issued by general consumers seeking information to understand their health symptoms or conditions. The number of teams registering their interest was 47 in Tasks 1 (2 teams in Task 1a and 7 teams in Task 1b) and 53 in Task 2 (12 teams) for a total of 20 unique teams. The best system recognized 4, 984 out of 6, 818 test words correctly and generated 2, 626 incorrect words (i.e., 38.5% error) in Task 1a; had the F-measure of 0.756 for plain entity recognition, 0.711 for normalized entity recognition, and 0.872 for entity normalization in Task 1b; and resulted in P@10 of 0.5394 and nDCG@10 of 0.5086 in Task 2. These results demonstrate the substantial community interest and capabilities of these systems in addressing challenges faced by patients and nurses. As in previous years, the organizers have made data and tools available for future research and development.

Description

Keywords

Citation

Source

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until

2037-12-31