ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2021
Random control selection for conducting high-throughput adverse drug events screening using large-scale longitudinal health data.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Precision Mixture Risk Model to Identify Adverse Drug Events in Subpopulations Using a Case-Crossover Design.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- An Early Adverse Drug Event Detection Approach with False Discovery Rate Control.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Random control selection for conducting high-throughput adverse drug events screening using large-scale longitudinal health data.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Case-control design based high-throughput pharmacoinformatics study using large-scale longitudinal health data is able to detect new adverse drug event (ADEs) signals. Existing control selection approaches for case-control design included the dynamic/super control selection approach. The dynamic/super control selection approach requires all individuals to be evaluated at all ADE case index dates, as the individuals' eligibilities as control depend on ADE/enrollment history. Thus, using large-scale longitudinal health data, the dynamic/super control selection approach requires extraordinarily high computational time. We proposed a random control selection approach in which ADE case index dates were matched by randomly generated control index dates. The random control selection approach does not depend on ADE/enrollment history. It is able to significantly reduce computational time to prepare case-control data sets, as it requires all individuals to be evaluated only once. We compared the performance metrics of all control selection approaches using two large-scale longitudinal health data and a drug-ADE gold standard including 399 drug-ADE pairs. The F-scores for the random control selection approach were between 0.586 and 0.600 compared to between 0.545 and 0.562 for dynamic/super control selection approaches. The random control selection approach was ~ 1000 times faster than dynamic/super control selection approach on preparing case-control data sets. With large-scale longitudinal health data, a case-control design-based pharmacoinformatics study using random control selection is able to generate comparable ADE signals than the existing control selection approaches. The random control selection approach also significantly reduces computational time to prepare the case-control data sets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.