Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22122057›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2012

Using text-mining techniques in electronic patient records to identify ADRs from medicine use.

Pernille Warrer, Ebba Holme Hansen, Lars Juhl-Jensen, Lise Aagaard

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Drug Abuse Research Trend Investigation with Text Mining.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Pharmacovigilance in China: development and challenges.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Pernille WarrerDepartment of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Section for Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. pwa@farma.ku.dk
Ebba Holme Hansen
Lars Juhl-Jensen
Lise Aagaard

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This literature review included studies that use text-mining techniques in narrative documents stored in electronic patient records (EPRs) to investigate ADRs. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts without restrictions from origin until July 2011. We included empirically based studies on text mining of electronic patient records (EPRs) that focused on detecting ADRs, excluding those that investigated adverse events not related to medicine use. We extracted information on study populations, EPR data sources, frequencies and types of the identified ADRs, medicines associated with ADRs, text-mining algorithms used and their performance. Seven studies, all from the United States, were eligible for inclusion in the review. Studies were published from 2001, the majority between 2009 and 2010. Text-mining techniques varied over time from simple free text searching of outpatient visit notes and inpatient discharge summaries to more advanced techniques involving natural language processing (NLP) of inpatient discharge summaries. Performance appeared to increase with the use of NLP, although many ADRs were still missed. Due to differences in study design and populations, various types of ADRs were identified and thus we could not make comparisons across studies. The review underscores the feasibility and potential of text mining to investigate narrative documents in EPRs for ADRs. However, more empirical studies are needed to evaluate whether text mining of EPRs can be used systematically to collect new information about ADRs.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsNatural Language ProcessingPharmacovigilanceAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAlgorithmsData MiningHumansMedical Records Systems, Computerized

Identifiers

PMID22122057
PMCPMC3403195

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.