Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23161894›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2013

Comparative analysis of pharmacovigilance methods in the detection of adverse drug reactions using electronic medical records.

Mei Liu, Eugenia Renne McPeek Hinz, Michael Edwin Matheny, Joshua C Denny, Jonathan Scott Schildcrout, Randolph A Miller, Hua Xu

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Precision Adverse Drug Reactions Prediction with Heterogeneous Graph Neural Network.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. PregOMICS-Leveraging systems biology and bioinformatics for drug repurposing in maternal-child health.American journal of reproductive immunology (New York, N.Y. : 1989) · 2018
    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

7 authors.

Mei LiuDepartment of Computer Science, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, New Jersey, USA.
Eugenia Renne McPeek Hinz
Michael Edwin Matheny
Joshua C Denny
Jonathan Scott Schildcrout
Randolph A Miller
Hua Xu

Funding

VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY CTSA FOR PEDIATRIC RESEARCHUL1RR024975 · NCRR · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI BERNARD, GORDON RAPHAEL · 2007 to 2011
$45.7M
Vanderbilt Biomedical Informatics Training ProgramT15LM007450 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Jessica S. Ancker, Bradley A. Malin · 2002 to 2026
$19.7M
TIME:(Tools for Inpatient Monitoring using Evidence)for Safe &AppropriateTestingR01LM007995 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI MILLER, RANDOLPH A · 2004 to 2009
$2.1M
An in-silico method for epidemiological studies using Electronic Medical RecordsR01CA141307 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI XU, HUA · 2009 to 2012
$1.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA141307NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024975NLM NIH HHS R01 LM007995NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMedication  safety requires that each drug be monitored throughout its market life as early detection of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can lead to alerts that prevent patient harm. Recently, electronic medical records (EMRs) have emerged as a valuable resource for pharmacovigilance. This study examines the use of retrospective medication orders and inpatient laboratory results documented in the EMR to identify ADRs.

methodsUsing 12 years of EMR data from Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), we designed a study to correlate abnormal laboratory results with specific drug administrations by comparing the outcomes of a drug-exposed group and a matched unexposed group. We assessed the relative merits of six pharmacovigilance measures used in spontaneous reporting systems (SRSs): proportional reporting ratio (PRR), reporting OR (ROR), Yule's Q (YULE), the χ(2) test (CHI), Bayesian confidence propagation neural networks (BCPNN), and a gamma Poisson shrinker (GPS).

resultsWe systematically evaluated the methods on two independently constructed reference standard datasets of drug-event pairs. The dataset of Yoon et al contained 470 drug-event pairs (10 drugs and 47 laboratory abnormalities). Using VUMC's EMR, we created another dataset of 378 drug-event pairs (nine drugs and 42 laboratory abnormalities). Evaluation on our reference standard showed that CHI, ROR, PRR, and YULE all had the same F score (62%). When the reference standard of Yoon et al was used, ROR had the best F score of 68%, with 77% precision and 61% recall.

conclusionsResults suggest that EMR-derived laboratory measurements and medication orders can help to validate previously reported ADRs, and detect new ADRs.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsPharmacovigilanceAlgorithmsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansProduct Surveillance, Postmarketing

Identifiers

PMID23161894
PMCPMC3628053

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.