Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27066806›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2016

Using Nonexperts for Annotating Pharmacokinetic Drug-Drug Interaction Mentions in Product Labeling: A Feasibility Study.

Harry Hochheiser, Yifan Ning, Andres Hernandez, John R Horn, Rebecca Jacobson, Richard D Boyce

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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.

Harry HochheiserDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States. harryh@pitt.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8793-9982

Funding

Addressing gaps in clinically useful evidence on drug-drug interactionsR01LM011838 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BOYCE, RICHARD DAVID · 2014 to 2017
$1.6M
Enhancing Research Informatics Capacity for Health Information in Colombia (ENRICD43TW008443 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI PUYANA, JUAN CARLOS · 2009 to 2013
$1.2M
Improving medication safety for nursing home residents prescribed psychotropic drK01AG044433 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BOYCE, RICHARD DAVID · 2014 to 2016
$342k
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW008443NIA NIH HHS K01 AG044433NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011838
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBecause vital details of potential pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions are often described in free-text structured product labels, manual curation is a necessary but expensive step in the development of electronic drug-drug interaction information resources. The use of nonexperts to annotate potential drug-drug interaction (PDDI) mentions in drug product label annotation may be a means of lessening the burden of manual curation.

objectiveOur goal was to explore the practicality of using nonexpert participants to annotate drug-drug interaction descriptions from structured product labels. By presenting annotation tasks to both pharmacy experts and relatively naïve participants, we hoped to demonstrate the feasibility of using nonexpert annotators for drug-drug information annotation. We were also interested in exploring whether and to what extent natural language processing (NLP) preannotation helped improve task completion time, accuracy, and subjective satisfaction.

methodsTwo experts and 4 nonexperts were asked to annotate 208 structured product label sections under 4 conditions completed sequentially: (1) no NLP assistance, (2) preannotation of drug mentions, (3) preannotation of drug mentions and PDDIs, and (4) a repeat of the no-annotation condition. Results were evaluated within the 2 groups and relative to an existing gold standard. Participants were asked to provide reports on the time required to complete tasks and their perceptions of task difficulty.

resultsOne of the experts and 3 of the nonexperts completed all tasks. Annotation results from the nonexpert group were relatively strong in every scenario and better than the performance of the NLP pipeline. The expert and 2 of the nonexperts were able to complete most tasks in less than 3 hours. Usability perceptions were generally positive (3.67 for expert, mean of 3.33 for nonexperts).

conclusionsThe results suggest that nonexpert annotation might be a feasible option for comprehensive labeling of annotated PDDIs across a broader range of drug product labels. Preannotation of drug mentions may ease the annotation task. However, preannotation of PDDIs, as operationalized in this study, presented the participants with difficulties. Future work should test if these issues can be addressed by the use of better performing NLP and a different approach to presenting the PDDI preannotations to users during the annotation workflow.

Indexed as

crowdsourcingdrug interactions, drug product labeling, structured product labelsnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID27066806
PMCPMC4844909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.