Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32410156›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2020

Prospective Evaluation of Adverse Event Recognition Systems in Twitter: Results from the Web-RADR Project.

Lucie M Gattepaille, Sara Hedfors Vidlin, Tomas Bergvall, Carrie E Pierce, Johan Ellenius

Abstract readEvaluation Study
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 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Pharmacovigilance in the digital age: gaining insight from social media data.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Lucie M GattepailleUppsala Monitoring Centre, Box 1051, 75140, Uppsala, Sweden. lucie.gattepaille@who-umc.org.
Sara Hedfors VidlinUppsala Monitoring Centre, Box 1051, 75140, Uppsala, Sweden.
Tomas BergvallUppsala Monitoring Centre, Box 1051, 75140, Uppsala, Sweden.
Carrie E PierceUppsala Monitoring Centre, Box 1051, 75140, Uppsala, Sweden.
Johan ElleniusUppsala Monitoring Centre, Box 1051, 75140, Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

Innovative Medicines Initiative 115632
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA large number of studies on systems to detect and sometimes normalize adverse events (AEs) in social media have been published, but evidence of their practical utility is scarce. This raises the question of the transferability of such systems to new settings.

objectivesThe aims of this study were to develop an AE recognition system, prospectively evaluate its performance on an external benchmark dataset and identify potential factors influencing the transferability of AE recognition systems.

methodsA pipeline based on dictionary lookups and logistic regression classifiers was developed using a proprietary dataset of 196,533 Tweets manually annotated for AE relations and prospectively evaluated the system on the publicly available WEB-RADR reference dataset, exploring different aspects affecting transferability.

resultsOur system achieved 0.53 precision, 0.52 recall and 0.52 F1-score on the development test set; however, when applied to the WEB-RADR reference dataset, system performance dropped to 0.38 precision, 0.20 recall and 0.26 F1-score. Similarly, a previously published method aiming at automatically detecting adverse event posts reported 0.5 precision, 0.92 recall and 0.65 F1-score on thus another dataset, while performance on the WEB-RADR reference dataset was reduced to 0.37 precision, 0.63 recall and 0.46 F1-score. We identified four potential factors leading to poor transferability: overfitting, selection bias, label bias and prevalence.

conclusionWe warn the community about a potentially large discrepancy between the expected performance of automated AE recognition systems based on published results and the actual observed performance on independent data. This study highlights the difficulty of implementing an all-purpose system for automatic adverse event recognition in Twitter, which could explain the lack of such systems in practical pharmacovigilance settings. Our recommendation is to use benchmark independent datasets, such as the WEB-RADR reference, to investigate the transferability of the adverse event recognition systems and ultimately enforce rigorous comparisons across studies on the task.

Indexed as

Social MediaAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDatabases, FactualDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansLogistic ModelsPharmacovigilancePrevalenceProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsSelection Bias

Identifiers

PMID32410156
PMCPMC7395913

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.