Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23233423›Full record

Trial reportPharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2013

An automated tool for detecting medication overuse based on the electronic health records.

Hojjat Salmasian, Daniel E Freedberg, Julian A Abrams, Carol Friedman

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Medication-indication knowledge bases: a systematic review and critical appraisal.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Natural Language Processing: from Bedside to Everywhere.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2022
    Article
  4. Clinical Concept Extraction with Lexical Semantics to Support Automatic Annotation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Applying the knowledge to action framework to plan a strategy for implementing breast cancer screening guidelines: an interprofessional perspective.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2013
    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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hojjat SalmasianDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, 622 West 168th Street, New York, NY 10032, USA. hos7004@dbmi.columbia.edu
Daniel E Freedberg
Julian A Abrams
Carol Friedman
Columbia University · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · US

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
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
Risk factors for site-specific metastasis in esophageal cancerK07CA132892 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ABRAMS, JULIAN · 2008 to 2012
$777k
NCI NIH HHS CA 132892NCI NIH HHS K07 CA132892NLM NIH HHS 5T15LM007079NLM NIH HHS R01 LM008635NLM NIH HHS R01 LM010016NLM NIH HHS R01 LM010016-0S1NLM NIH HHS R01 LM010016-0S2NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMedication overuse is a serious concern in healthcare as it leads to increased expenditures, side effects, and morbidities. Identifying overuse is only possible through excluding appropriate indications that are primarily mentioned in unstructured notes. We developed a framework for automatic identification of medication overuse and applied it to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs).

methodsWe first created an indications knowledge base using data from drug labels, clinical guidelines, expert opinion, and other sources. We also obtained the list of current problems for 200 randomly selected inpatients who received PPIs using a natural language processing system and the discharge summaries of those patients. These problems were checked against the indications knowledge base to identify overuse candidates. Two gastroenterologists manually reviewed the notes and identified cases of overuse. Results from the automated framework were compared with the manual review.

resultsReviewers had high interrater reliability in finding indications (agreement = 92.1%, Cohen's κ = 0.773). In 137 notes included in the final analysis, our system identified indications with a sensitivity of 74% (95%CI = 59-86) and specificity of 95% (95%CI = 87-98). In cases of appropriate use where the automated system also found one or more indications, it always included the correct indication.

conclusionsWe created an automated system that can identify established indications of medication use in electronic health records with high accuracy. It can provide clinical decision support for identifying potential overuse of PPIs and could be useful for reducing overuse and encouraging better documentation of indications.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overDocumentationDrug PrescriptionsDrug Utilization ReviewElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMaleMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProton Pump InhibitorsProton Pump Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID23233423
PMCPMC3566345
OpenAlexW1610100449

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.