ArticlePloS one2024
An interpretable machine learning framework for opioid overdose surveillance from emergency medical services records.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Opioid Safety Surveillance from Clinical Text: A Clinically Focused Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Predictive modeling of methadone poisoning outcomes in children ≤ 5 years: utilizing machine learning and the National Poison Data System for improved clinical decision-making.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- COVID-19 public health restrictions and opioid overdoes: a summative content analysis of emergency medical services records in three Texas counties.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The goal of this study is to develop and validate a lightweight, interpretable machine learning (ML) classifier to identify opioid overdoses in emergency medical services (EMS) records. We conducted a comparative assessment of three feature engineering approaches designed for use with unstructured narrative data. Opioid overdose annotations were provided by two harm reduction paramedics and two supporting annotators trained to reliably match expert annotations. Candidate feature engineering techniques included term frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF), a highly performant approach to concept vectorization, and a custom approach based on the count of empirically-identified keywords. Each feature set was trained using four model architectures: generalized linear model (GLM), Naïve Bayes, neural network, and Extreme Gradient Boost (XGBoost). Ensembles of trained models were also evaluated. The custom feature models were also assessed for variable importance to aid interpretation. Models trained using TF-IDF feature engineering ranged from AUROC = 0.59 (95% CI: 0.53-0.66) for the Naïve Bayes to AUROC = 0.76 (95% CI: 0.71-0.81) for the neural network. Models trained using concept vectorization features ranged from AUROC = 0.83 (95% 0.78-0.88)for the Naïve Bayes to AUROC = 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.94) for the ensemble. Models trained using custom features were the most performant, with benchmarks ranging from AUROC = 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88-0.95) with the GLM to 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90-0.96) for the ensemble. The custom features model achieved positive predictive values (PPV) ranging for 80 to 100%, which represent substantial improvements over previously published EMS encounter opioid overdose classifiers. The application of this approach to county EMS data can productively inform local and targeted harm reduction initiatives.
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.