Abstract

Objective Determine whether agreement among annotators improves after being trained to use an annotation schema that specifies: what types of clinical conditions to annotate, the linguistic form of the annotations, and which modifiers to include. Methods Three physicians and 3 lay people individually annotated all clinical conditions in 23 emergency department reports. For annotations made using a Baseline Schema and annotations made after training on a detailed annotation schema, we compared: (1) variability of annotation length and number and (2) annotator agreement, using the F-measure. Results Physicians showed higher agreement and lower variability after training on the detailed annotation schema than when applying the Baseline Schema. Lay people agreed with physicians almost as well as other physicians did but showed a slower learning curve. Conclusion Training annotators on the annotation schema we developed increased agreement among annotators and should be useful in generating reference standard sets for natural language processing studies. The methodology we used to evaluate the schema could be applied to other types of annotation or classification tasks in biomedical informatics.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.