Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37487037›Full record

ArticleChemical research in toxicology2023

Classifying Free Texts Into Predefined Sections Using AI in Regulatory Documents: A Case Study with Drug Labeling Documents.

Magnus Gray, Joshua Xu, Weida Tong, Leihong Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chemical research in toxicology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. RxBERT: Enhancing drug labeling text mining and analysis with AI language modeling.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  2. Review
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

4 authors.

Magnus GrayDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, Arkansas 72079 United States.
Joshua XuDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, Arkansas 72079 United States.
Weida TongDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, Arkansas 72079 United States.
Leihong WuDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, Arkansas 72079 United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4093-3708

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory process often involves several reviewers who focus on sets of information related to their respective areas of review. Accordingly, manufacturers that provide submission packages to regulatory agencies are instructed to organize the contents using a structure that enables the information to be easily allocated, retrieved, and reviewed. However, this practice is not always followed correctly; as such, some documents are not well structured, with similar information spreading across different sections, hindering the efficient access and review of all of the relevant data as a whole. To improve this common situation, we evaluated an artificial intelligence (AI)-based natural language processing (NLP) methodology, called Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), to automatically classify free-text information into standardized sections, supporting a holistic review of drug safety and efficacy. Specifically, FDA labeling documents were used in this study as a proof of concept, where the labeling section structure defined by the Physician Label Rule (PLR) was used to classify labels in the development of the model. The model was subsequently evaluated on texts from both well-structured labeling documents (i.e., PLR-based labeling) and less- or differently structured documents (i.e., non-PLR and Summary of Product Characteristic [SmPC] labeling.) In the training process, the model yielded 96% and 88% accuracy for binary and multiclass tasks, respectively. The testing accuracies observed for the PLR, non-PLR, and SmPC testing data sets for the binary model were 95%, 88%, and 88%, and for the multiclass model were 82%, 73%, and 68%, respectively. Our study demonstrated that automatically classifying free texts into standardized sections with AI language models could be an advanced regulatory science approach for supporting the review process by effectively processing unformatted documents.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDrug LabelingElectric Power SuppliesProduct LabelingUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug Administration

Identifiers

PMID37487037
PMCPMC10445280

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.