Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30459145›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2018

Web-Based Signal Detection Using Medical Forums Data in France: Comparative Analysis.

Marie-Laure Kürzinger, Stéphane Schück, Nathalie Texier, Redhouane Abdellaoui, Carole Faviez, Julie Pouget, Ling Zhang, Stéphanie Tcherny-Lessenot, Stephen Lin, Juhaeri Juhaeri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. [Utilizing social media data in post-market safety surveillance].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

10 authors.

Marie-Laure KürzingerEpidemiology and Benefit Risk Evaluation, Sanofi, Chilly-Mazarin, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2606-776X
Stéphane SchückKappa Santé, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2642-7726
Nathalie TexierKappa Santé, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3749-254X
Redhouane AbdellaouiKap Code, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2938-7478
Carole FaviezKap Code, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1500-0236
Julie PougetInformation Technology and Solutions, Sanofi, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8630-0052
Ling ZhangGlobal Pharmacovigilance, Sanofi, Bridgewater, NJ, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1355-3793
Stéphanie Tcherny-LessenotEpidemiology and Benefit Risk Evaluation, Sanofi, Chilly-Mazarin, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0312-9008
Stephen LinGlobal Pharmacovigilance, Sanofi, Bridgewater, NJ, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5616-558X
Juhaeri JuhaeriEpidemiology and Benefit Risk Evaluation, Sanofi, Bridgewater, NJ, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8235-8388

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile traditional signal detection methods in pharmacovigilance are based on spontaneous reports, the use of social media is emerging. The potential strength of Web-based data relies on their volume and real-time availability, allowing early detection of signals of disproportionate reporting (SDRs).

objectiveThis study aimed (1) to assess the consistency of SDRs detected from patients' medical forums in France compared with those detected from the traditional reporting systems and (2) to assess the ability of SDRs in identifying earlier than the traditional reporting systems.

methodsMessages posted on patients' forums between 2005 and 2015 were used. We retained 8 disproportionality definitions. Comparison of SDRs from the forums with SDRs detected in VigiBase was done by describing the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, receiver operating characteristics curve, and the area under the curve (AUC). The time difference in months between the detection dates of SDRs from the forums and VigiBase was provided.

resultsThe comparison analysis showed that the sensitivity ranged from 29% to 50.6%, the specificity from 86.1% to 95.5%, the PPV from 51.2% to 75.4%, the NPV from 68.5% to 91.6%, and the accuracy from 68% to 87.7%. The AUC reached 0.85 when using the metric empirical Bayes geometric mean. Up to 38% (12/32) of the SDRs were detected earlier in the forums than that in VigiBase.

conclusionsThe specificity, PPV, and NPV were high. The overall performance was good, showing that data from medical forums may be a valuable source for signal detection. In total, up to 38% (12/32) of the SDRs could have been detected earlier, thus, ensuring the increased safety of patients. Further enhancements are needed to investigate the reliability and validation of patients' medical forums worldwide, the extension of this analysis to all possible drugs or at least to a wider selection of drugs, as well as to further assess performance against established signals.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualFranceHumansInternetPharmacovigilanceadverse eventinternetmedical forumspharmacovigilancesignal detectionsignals of disproportionate reportingsocial media

Identifiers

PMID30459145
PMCPMC6280030

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.