Processing of Short-Form Content in Clinical Narratives: Systematic Scoping Review

BackgroundClinical narratives are essential components of electronic health records. The adoption of electronic health records has increased documentation time for hospital staff, leading to the use of abbreviations and acronyms more frequently. This brevity can potentially hinder comprehension for both professionals and patients. ObjectiveThis review aims to provide an overview of the types of short forms found in clinical narratives, as well as the natural language processing (NLP) techniques used for their identification, expansion, and disambiguation. MethodsIn the databases Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, EBMR (Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews), and ACL Anthology, publications that met the inclusion criteria were searched according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for a systematic scoping review. Original, peer-reviewed publications focusing on short-form processing in human clinical narratives were included, covering the period from January 2018 to February 2023. Short-form types were extracted, and multidimensional research methodologies were assigned to each target objective (identification, expansion, and disambiguation). NLP study recommendations and study characteristics were systematically assigned occurrence rates for evaluation. ResultsOut of a total of 6639 records, only 19 articles were included in the final analysis. Rule-based approaches were predominantly used for identifying short forms, while string similarity and vector representations were applied for expansion. Embeddings and deep learning approaches were used for disambiguation. ConclusionsThe scope and types of what constitutes a clinical short form were often not explicitly defined by the authors. This lack of definition poses challenges for reproducibility and for determining whether specific methodologies are suitable for different types of short forms. Analysis of a subset of NLP recommendations for assessing quality and reproducibility revealed only partial adherence to these recommendations. Single-character abbreviations were underrepresented in studies on clinical narrative processing, as were investigations in languages other than English. Future research should focus on these 2 areas, and each paper should include descriptions of the types of content analyzed.