Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31605285›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2020

Application of Augmented Intelligence for Pharmacovigilance Case Seriousness Determination.

Ramani Routray, Niki Tetarenko, Claire Abu-Assal, Ruta Mockute, Bruno Assuncao, Hanqing Chen, Shenghua Bao, Karolina Danysz, Sameen Desai, Salvatore Cicirello and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

14 authors.

Ramani RoutrayIBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, USA. routrayr@us.ibm.com.
Niki TetarenkoCelgene, Summit, NJ, USA.
Claire Abu-AssalIBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Ruta MockuteCelgene, Summit, NJ, USA.
Bruno AssuncaoCelgene, Summit, NJ, USA.
Hanqing ChenIBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Shenghua BaoIBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Karolina DanyszCelgene, Summit, NJ, USA.
Sameen DesaiCelgene, Summit, NJ, USA.
Salvatore CicirelloCelgene, Summit, NJ, USA.
Van WillisIBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Sharon Hensley AlfordIBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Vivek KrishnamurthyIBM Watson Health, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Edward MingleCelgene, Summit, NJ, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIdentification of adverse events and determination of their seriousness ensures timely detection of potential patient safety concerns. Adverse event seriousness is a key factor in defining reporting timelines and is often performed manually by pharmacovigilance experts. The dramatic increase in the volume of safety reports necessitates exploration of scalable solutions that also meet reporting timeline requirements.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to develop an augmented intelligence methodology for automatically identifying adverse event seriousness in spontaneous, solicited, and medical literature safety reports. Deep learning models were evaluated for accuracy and/or the F1 score against a ground truth labeled by pharmacovigilance experts.

methodsUsing a stratified random sample of safety reports received by Celgene, we developed three neural networks for addressing identification of adverse event seriousness: (1) a binary adverse-event level seriousness classifier; (2) a classifier for determining seriousness categorization at the adverse-event level; and (3) an annotator for identifying seriousness criteria terms to provide supporting evidence at the document level.

resultsThe seriousness classifier achieved an accuracy of 83.0% in post-marketing reports, 92.9% in solicited reports, and 86.3% in medical literature reports. F1 scores for seriousness categorization were 77.7 for death, 78.9 for hospitalization, and 75.5 for important medical events. The seriousness annotator achieved an F1 score of 89.9 in solicited reports, and 75.2 in medical literature reports.

conclusionsThe results of this study indicate that a neural network approach can provide an accurate and scalable solution for potentially augmenting pharmacovigilance practitioner determination of adverse event seriousness in spontaneous, solicited, and medical literature reports.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsNeural Networks, ComputerDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansPharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID31605285
PMCPMC6965337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.