Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34270701›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2021

DeepADEMiner: a deep learning pharmacovigilance pipeline for extraction and normalization of adverse drug event mentions on Twitter.

Arjun Magge, Elena Tutubalina, Zulfat Miftahutdinov, Ilseyar Alimova, Anne Dirkson, Suzan Verberne, Davy Weissenbacher, Graciela Gonzalez-Hernandez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Pharmacovigilance in the digital age: gaining insight from social media data.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Overview of the 8medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Arjun MaggeDBEI, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Elena TutubalinaKazan Federal University, Kazan, Russia.
Zulfat MiftahutdinovKazan Federal University, Kazan, Russia.
Ilseyar AlimovaKazan Federal University, Kazan, Russia.
Anne DirksonLIACS, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
Suzan VerberneLIACS, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
Davy WeissenbacherDBEI, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Graciela Gonzalez-HernandezDBEI, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Funding

Social Media Mining for PharmacovigilanceR01LM011176 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GONZALEZ HERNANDEZ, GRACIELA, SHEN, LI · 2012 to 2021
$4.5M
NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011176NLM NIH HHS R01LM011176
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveResearch on pharmacovigilance from social media data has focused on mining adverse drug events (ADEs) using annotated datasets, with publications generally focusing on 1 of 3 tasks: ADE classification, named entity recognition for identifying the span of ADE mentions, and ADE mention normalization to standardized terminologies. While the common goal of such systems is to detect ADE signals that can be used to inform public policy, it has been impeded largely by limited end-to-end solutions for large-scale analysis of social media reports for different drugs. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe present a dataset for training and evaluation of ADE pipelines where the ADE distribution is closer to the average 'natural balance' with ADEs present in about 7% of the tweets. The deep learning architecture involves an ADE extraction pipeline with individual components for all 3 tasks.

resultsThe system presented achieved state-of-the-art performance on comparable datasets and scored a classification performance of F1 = 0.63, span extraction performance of F1 = 0.44 and an end-to-end entity resolution performance of F1 = 0.34 on the presented dataset. DISCUSSION: The performance of the models continues to highlight multiple challenges when deploying pharmacovigilance systems that use social media data. We discuss the implications of such models in the downstream tasks of signal detection and suggest future enhancements.

conclusionMining ADEs from Twitter posts using a pipeline architecture requires the different components to be trained and tuned based on input data imbalance in order to ensure optimal performance on the end-to-end resolution task.

Indexed as

Deep LearningDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsSocial MediaHumansPharmacovigilancedrug safetyinformation extractionnatural language processingpharmacovigilancesocial media mining

Identifiers

PMID34270701
PMCPMC8449608

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.