Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30526590›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2018

An automated pipeline for analyzing medication event reports in clinical settings.

Sicheng Zhou, Hong Kang, Bin Yao, Yang Gong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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.

Sicheng ZhouSchool of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 7000 Fannin Street, Suite 600, Houston, 77030, TX, USA.
Hong KangSchool of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 7000 Fannin Street, Suite 600, Houston, 77030, TX, USA.
Bin YaoSchool of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 7000 Fannin Street, Suite 600, Houston, 77030, TX, USA.
Yang GongSchool of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 7000 Fannin Street, Suite 600, Houston, 77030, TX, USA. Yang.Gong@uth.tmc.edu.

Funding

Learning from patient safety events: A case base tool kitR01HS022895 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI GONG, YANG · 2014 to 2018
$1.2M
AHRQ HHS R01 HS022895
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedication events in clinical settings are significant threats to patient safety. Analyzing and learning from the medication event reports is an important way to prevent the recurrence of these events. Currently, the analysis of medication event reports is ineffective and requires heavy workloads for clinicians. An automated pipeline is proposed to help clinicians deal with the accumulated reports, extract valuable information and generate feedback from the reports. Thus, the strategy of medication event prevention can be further developed based on the lessons learned.

methodsIn order to build the automated pipeline, four classic machine learning classifiers (i.e., support vector machine, Naïve Bayes, random forest, and multi-layer perceptron) were compared to identify the event originating stages, event types, and event causes from the medication event reports. The precision, recall and F-1 measure were calculated to assess the performance of the classifiers. Further, a strategy to measure the similarity of medication event reports in our pipeline was established and evaluated by human subjects through a questionnaire.

resultsWe developed three classifiers to identify the medication event originating stages, event types and causes, respectively. For the event originating stages, a support vector machine classifier obtains the best performance with an F-1 measure of 0.792. For the event types, a support vector machine classifier exhibits the best performance with an F-1 measure of 0.758. And for the event causes, a random forest classifier reaches an F-1 measure of 0.925. The questionnaire results show that the similarity measurement is consistent with the domain experts in the task of identifying similar reports.

conclusionWe developed and evaluated an automated pipeline that could identify three attributes from the medication event reports and calculate the similarity scores between the reports based on the attributes. The pipeline is expected to improve the efficiency of analyzing the medication event reports and to learn from the reports in a timely manner.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsMachine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerPatient SafetyRisk ManagementHumansSupport Vector MachineEvent reportingMachine learningMedication eventsPatient safety

Identifiers

PMID30526590
PMCPMC6284273

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.