Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34694230›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2021

Adverse Drug Event Prediction Using Noisy Literature-Derived Knowledge Graphs: Algorithm Development and Validation.

Soham Dasgupta, Aishwarya Jayagopal, Abel Lim Jun Hong, Ragunathan Mariappan, Vaibhav Rajan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Soham DasguptaMallya Aditi International School, Bangalore, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0522-9889
Aishwarya JayagopalSchool of Computing, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5658-0724
Abel Lim Jun HongSchool of Computing, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7503-0624
Ragunathan MariappanSchool of Computing, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7242-0966
Vaibhav RajanDepartment of Information Systems and Analytics, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6748-6864
National University of Singapore · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdverse drug events (ADEs) are unintended side effects of drugs that cause substantial clinical and economic burdens globally. Not all ADEs are discovered during clinical trials; therefore, postmarketing surveillance, called pharmacovigilance, is routinely conducted to find unknown ADEs. A wealth of information, which facilitates ADE discovery, lies in the growing body of biomedical literature. Knowledge graphs (KGs) encode information from the literature, where the vertices and the edges represent clinical concepts and their relations, respectively. The scale and unstructured form of the literature necessitates the use of natural language processing (NLP) to automatically create such KGs. Previous studies have demonstrated the utility of such literature-derived KGs in ADE prediction. Through unsupervised learning of the representations (features) of clinical concepts from the KG, which are used in machine learning models, state-of-the-art results for ADE prediction were obtained on benchmark data sets.

objectiveDue to the use of NLP to infer literature-derived KGs, there is noise in the form of false positive (erroneous) and false negative (absent) nodes and edges. Previous representation learning methods do not account for such inaccuracies in the graph. NLP algorithms can quantify the confidence in their inference of extracted concepts and relations from the literature. Our hypothesis, which motivates this work, is that by using such confidence scores during representation learning, the learned embeddings would yield better features for ADE prediction models.

methodsWe developed methods to use these confidence scores on two well-known representation learning methods-DeepWalk and Translating Embeddings for Modeling Multi-relational Data (TransE)-to develop their weighted versions: Weighted DeepWalk and Weighted TransE. These methods were used to learn representations from a large literature-derived KG, the Semantic MEDLINE Database, which contains more than 93 million clinical relations. They were compared with Embedding of Semantic Predications, which, to our knowledge, is the best reported representation learning method using the Semantic MEDLINE Database with state-of-the-art results for ADE prediction. Representations learned from different methods were used (separately) as features of drugs and diseases to build classification models for ADE prediction using benchmark data sets. The methods were compared rigorously over multiple cross-validation settings.

resultsThe weighted versions we designed were able to learn representations that yielded more accurate predictive models than the corresponding unweighted versions of both DeepWalk and TransE, as well as Embedding of Semantic Predications, in our experiments. There were performance improvements of up to 5.75% in the F

conclusionsOur classification models can be used to aid pharmacovigilance teams in detecting potentially new ADEs. Our experiments demonstrate the importance of modeling inaccuracies in the inferred KGs for representation learning.

Indexed as

adverse drug eventbiomedical literatureEmbedding of Semantic Predicationsknowledge graph

Identifiers

PMID34694230
PMCPMC8576589
OpenAlexW3199673018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.