Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30611893›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2019

A systematic approach for developing a corpus of patient reported adverse drug events: A case study for SSRI and SNRI medications.

Maryam Zolnoori, Kin Wah Fung, Timothy B Patrick, Paul Fontelo, Hadi Kharrazi, Anthony Faiola, Yi Shuan Shirley Wu, Christina E Eldredge, Jake Luo, Mike Conway and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. From Conversation to Standardized Terminology: An LLM-RAG Approach for Automated Health Problem Identification in Home Healthcare.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Social Media Analytics for Pharmacovigilance of Antiepileptic Drugs.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Distant supervision for medical concept normalization.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2020
    Article
  10. RadLex Normalization in Radiology Reports.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

15 authors.

Maryam ZolnooriDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, United States; Lister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States; Section of Medical Informatics, Department of Health Science Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. Electronic address: Zolnoori.Maryam@Mayo.edu.
Kin Wah FungLister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States. Electronic address: kfung@mail.nih.gov.
Timothy B PatrickDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, United States.
Paul FonteloLister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, United States. Electronic address: pfontelo@mail.nih.gov.
Hadi KharraziDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Anthony FaiolaDepartment of Biomedical and Health Information Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States.
Yi Shuan Shirley WuSchool of Pharmacy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Christina E EldredgeSchool of Information, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States.
Jake LuoDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, United States.
Mike ConwayDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Utah University, Salt Lake City, United States.
Jiaxi ZhuEmmes Corporation, Rockville, MD, United States.
Soo Kyung ParkDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Kelly XuSchool of Pharmacy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Hamideh MoayyedCollege of Letters and Science, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, WI, United States.
Somaieh GoudarzvandSchool of Computing and Engineering, University of Missouri-Kansas, Kansas City, MO, United States.

Funding

Clinical and Informatics Research in Medical TerminologiesZIALM010013 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI FUNG, KIN WAH · 2018 to 2020
$1.6M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 LM999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"Psychiatric Treatment Adverse Reactions" (PsyTAR) corpus is an annotated corpus that has been developed using patients narrative data for psychiatric medications, particularly SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor) and SNRIs (Serotonin Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitor) medications. This corpus consists of three main components: sentence classification, entity identification, and entity normalization. We split the review posts into sentences and labeled them for presence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) (2168 sentences), withdrawal symptoms (WDs) (438 sentences), sign/symptoms/illness (SSIs) (789 sentences), drug indications (517), drug effectiveness (EF) (1087 sentences), and drug infectiveness (INF) (337 sentences). In the entity identification phase, we identified and extracted ADRs (4813 mentions), WDs (590 mentions), SSIs (1219 mentions), and DIs (792). In the entity normalization phase, we mapped the identified entities to the corresponding concepts in both UMLS (918 unique concepts) and SNOMED CT (755 unique concepts). Four annotators double coded the sentences and the span of identified entities by strictly following guidelines rules developed for this study. We used the PsyTAR sentence classification component to automatically train a range of supervised machine learning classifiers to identifying text segments with the mentions of ADRs, WDs, DIs, SSIs, EF, and INF. SVMs classifiers had the highest performance with F-Score 0.90. We also measured performance of the cTAKES (clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System) in identifying patients' expressions of ADRs and WDs with and without adding PsyTAR dictionary to the core dictionary of cTAKES. Augmenting cTAKES dictionary with PsyTAR improved the F-score cTAKES by 25%. The findings imply that PsyTAR has significant implications for text mining algorithms aimed to identify information about adverse drug events and drug effectiveness from patients' narratives data, by linking the patients' expressions of adverse drug events to medical standard vocabularies. The corpus is publicly available at Zolnoori et al. [30].

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAlgorithmsData CollectionData MiningHumansPharmacovigilanceSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsSerotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake InhibitorsSystematized Nomenclature of MedicineUnified Medical Language SystemSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsSerotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake InhibitorsAdverse drug eventsAnnotated corpusDrug effectivenessDrug safetyInformation extractionMachine learningOnline healthcare forumsPatients narrativesPsychiatric medicationsSemantic mappingSNOMED CTSNRIsSocial mediaSSRIsText miningUMLS

Identifiers

PMID30611893
PMCPMC12139017

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.