Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22713699›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2012

Detection of pharmacovigilance-related adverse events using electronic health records and automated methods.

K Haerian, D Varn, S Vaidya, L Ena, H S Chase, C Friedman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed
–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

62 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. How can artificial intelligence optimize value-based contracting?Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. An atomic approach to the design and implementation of a research data warehouse.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A study of deep learning approaches for medication and adverse drug event extraction from clinical text.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

K HaerianDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. krh7003@dmi.columbia.edu
D Varn
S Vaidya
L Ena
H S Chase
C Friedman

Funding

Training in Biomedical Informatics at Columbia UniversityT15LM007079 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI NOEMIE ELHADAD, GEORGE M HRIPCSAK · 1992 to 2026
$28.9M
DISCOVERING AND APPLYING KNOWLEDGE IN CLINICAL DATABASESR01LM006910 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI HRIPCSAK, GEORGE M · 2000 to 2023
$10.6M
Pharmacovigilence using Natural Language Processing, Statistics, and the EHRR01LM010016 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI FRIEDMAN, CAROL · 2009 to 2016
$3.4M
A Biomedical Natural Language Processing ResourceR01LM008635 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI FRIEDMAN, CAROL · 2005 to 2008
$2.1M
NLM NIH HHS R01 LM006910NLM NIH HHS R01 LM008635NLM NIH HHS R01:LM008635NLM NIH HHS R01 LM010016NLM NIH HHS R01:LM010016NLM NIH HHS R01:LM010016-0S1NLM NIH HHS R01:LM010016-0S2NLM NIH HHS R01:LM06910NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007079NLM NIH HHS T15:LM007079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic health records (EHRs) are an important source of data for detection of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). However, adverse events are frequently due not to medications but to the patients' underlying conditions. Mining to detect ADRs from EHR data must account for confounders. We developed an automated method using natural-language processing (NLP) and a knowledge source to differentiate cases in which the patient's disease is responsible for the event rather than a drug. Our method was applied to 199,920 hospitalization records, concentrating on two serious ADRs: rhabdomyolysis (n = 687) and agranulocytosis (n = 772). Our method automatically identified 75% of the cases, those with disease etiology. The sensitivity and specificity were 93.8% (confidence interval: 88.9-96.7%) and 91.8% (confidence interval: 84.0-96.2%), respectively. The method resulted in considerable saving of time: for every 1 h spent in development, there was a saving of at least 20 h in manual review. The review of the remaining 25% of the cases therefore became more feasible, allowing us to identify the medications that had caused the ADRs.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsElectronic Health RecordsPharmacovigilanceAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAgranulocytosisHumansNew York CityRhabdomyolysisSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID22713699
PMCPMC3685297

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.