Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38699208›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2024

Deep learning-based method for sentiment analysis for patients' drug reviews.

Sena Al-Hadhrami, Tamas Vinko, Tawfik Al-Hadhrami, Faisal Saeed, Sultan Noman Qasem

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2024. 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. Article
  2. 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.

Sena Al-HadhramiInstitute of Informatics, Faculty of Science and Informatics, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Tamas VinkoInstitute of Informatics, Faculty of Science and Informatics, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.
Tawfik Al-HadhramiComputer Science Department, School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Faisal SaeedDAAI Researsh Group, College of Computing and Digital Technology, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Sultan Noman QasemComputer Science Department, College of Computer and Information Sciences, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article explores the application of deep learning techniques for sentiment analysis of patients' drug reviews. The main focus is to evaluate the effectiveness of bidirectional long-short-term memory (LSTM) and a hybrid model (bidirectional LSTM-CNN) for sentiment classification based on the entire review text, medical conditions, and rating scores. This study also investigates the impact of using GloVe word embeddings on the model's performance. Two different drug review datasets were used to train and test the models. The proposed methodology involves the implementation and evaluation of both deep learning models with the GloVe word embeddings for sentiment analysis of drug reviews. The experimental results indicate that Model A (Bi-LSTM-CNN) achieved an accuracy of 96% and Model B (Bi-LSTM-CNN) performs consistently at 87% for accuracy. Notably, the incorporation of GloVe word representations improves the overall performance of the models, as supported by Cohen's Kappa coefficient, indicating a high level of agreement. These findings showed the efficacy of deep learning-based approaches, particularly bidirectional LSTM and bidirectional LSTM-CNN, for sentiment analysis of patients' drug reviews.

Indexed as

Bidirectional LSTM-CNNBi-LSTM-CNNCNNDeep learningLSTMPatients’ drug reviewsSentiment analysis

Identifiers

PMID38699208
PMCPMC11065412

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.