Natural language processing for clinical notes in dentistry: A systematic review

Objective: To identify and synthesise research on applications of natural language processing (NLP) for information extraction and retrieval from clinical notes in dentistry. Materials and methods: A predefined search strategy was applied in EMBASE, CINAHL and Medline. Studies eligible for inclusion were those that that described, evaluated, or applied NLP to clinical notes containing either human or simulated patient information. Quality of the study design and reporting was independently assessed based on a set of questions derived from relevant tools including CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS). A narrative synthesis was conducted to present the results. Results: Of the 17 included studies, 10 developed and evaluated NLP methods and 7 described applications of NLP-based information retrieval methods in dental records. Studies were published between 2015 and 2021, most were missing key details needed for reproducibility, and there was no consistency in design or reporting. The 10 studies developing or evaluating NLP methods used document classification or entity extraction, and 4 compared NLP methods to non-NLP methods. The quality of reporting on NLP studies in dentistry has modestly improved over time. Conclusions: Study design heterogeneity and incomplete reporting of studies currently limits our ability to synthesise NLP applications in dental records. Standardisation of reporting and improved connections between NLP methods and applied NLP in dentistry may improve how we can make use of clinical notes from dentistry in population health or decision support systems. Protocol Registration. PROSPERO CRD42021227823.

Automated summary

The objective of this study was to review the applications of natural language processing (NLP) for information extraction and retrieval from clinical notes in dentistry. A search strategy was implemented in EMBASE, CINAHL, and Medline to identify relevant studies. A total of 17 studies were included, demonstrating heterogeneity in study design and reporting quality. The findings suggest a need for standardization in reporting and improved connections between NLP methods and applied NLP in dentistry.