Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36595517›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Adverse drug event detection using natural language processing: A scoping review of supervised learning methods.

Rachel M Murphy, Joanna E Klopotowska, Nicolette F de Keizer, Kitty J Jager, Jan Hendrik Leopold, Dave A Dongelmans, Ameen Abu-Hanna, Martijn C Schut

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
16.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The use of natural language processing in detecting and predicting falls within the healthcare setting: a systematic review.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Large language models in critical care.Journal of intensive medicine · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Probing Large Language Model Hidden States for Adverse Drug Reaction Knowledge.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachel M MurphyDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC (location AMC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2602-5658
Joanna E KlopotowskaDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC (location AMC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nicolette F de KeizerDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC (location AMC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Kitty J JagerDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC (location AMC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jan Hendrik LeopoldDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC (location AMC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Dave A DongelmansAmsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ameen Abu-HannaDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC (location AMC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Martijn C SchutDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC (location AMC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4591-9646
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To reduce adverse drug events (ADEs), hospitals need a system to support them in monitoring ADE occurrence routinely, rapidly, and at scale. Natural language processing (NLP), a computerized approach to analyze text data, has shown promising results for the purpose of ADE detection in the context of pharmacovigilance. However, a detailed qualitative assessment and critical appraisal of NLP methods for ADE detection in the context of ADE monitoring in hospitals is lacking. Therefore, we have conducted a scoping review to close this knowledge gap, and to provide directions for future research and practice. We included articles where NLP was applied to detect ADEs in clinical narratives within electronic health records of inpatients. Quantitative and qualitative data items relating to NLP methods were extracted and critically appraised. Out of 1,065 articles screened for eligibility, 29 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most frequent tasks included named entity recognition (n = 17; 58.6%) and relation extraction/classification (n = 15; 51.7%). Clinical involvement was reported in nine studies (31%). Multiple NLP modelling approaches seem suitable, with Long Short Term Memory and Conditional Random Field methods most commonly used. Although reported overall performance of the systems was high, it provides an inflated impression given a steep drop in performance when predicting the ADE entity or ADE relation class. When annotating corpora, treating an ADE as a relation between a drug and non-drug entity seems the best practice. Future research should focus on semi-automated methods to reduce the manual annotation effort, and examine implementation of the NLP methods in practice.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsNatural Language ProcessingElectronic Health RecordsHumansPharmacovigilanceSupervised Machine Learning

Identifiers

PMID36595517
PMCPMC9810201
OpenAlexW4313460860

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.