ArticleBMC medical imaging2024
Advancing medical imaging: detecting polypharmacy and adverse drug effects with Graph Convolutional Networks (GCN).
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explainable Machine Learning for Predicting Adverse Drug Events in Older Adults with Polypharmacy: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- AI and network biology for rational polypharmacology in signaling drug design: a review.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in ovarian cancer: transforming detection, treatment, and prevention.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Review
- Knowledge graph-enhanced deep learning for pharmaceutical demand forecasting.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Analysis of the interaction network relationship between drugs using a graph neural network.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Sedative co-medication patterns across frailty states in people with HIV: a network-based study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Polypharmacy involves an individual using many medications at the same time and is a frequent healthcare technique used to treat complex medical disorders. Nevertheless, it also presents substantial risks of negative medication responses and interactions. Identifying and addressing adverse effects caused by polypharmacy is crucial to ensure patient safety and improve healthcare results. This paper introduces a new method using Graph Convolutional Networks (GCN) to identify polypharmacy side effects. Our strategy involves developing a medicine interaction graph in which edges signify drug-drug intuitive predicated on pharmacological properties and hubs symbolize drugs. GCN is a well-suited profound learning procedure for graph-based representations of social information. It can be used to anticipate the probability of medicate unfavorable impacts and to memorize important representations of sedate intuitive. Tests were conducted on a huge dataset of patients' pharmaceutical records commented on with watched medicate unfavorable impacts in arrange to approve our strategy. Execution of the GCN show, which was prepared on a subset of this dataset, was evaluated through a disarray framework. The perplexity network shows the precision with which the show categories occasions. Our discoveries demonstrate empowering advance within the recognizable proof of antagonistic responses related with polypharmaceuticals. For cardiovascular system target drugs, GCN technique achieved an accuracy of 94.12%, precision of 86.56%, F1-Score of 88.56%, AUC of 89.74% and recall of 87.92%. For respiratory system target drugs, GCN technique achieved an accuracy of 93.38%, precision of 85.64%, F1-Score of 89.79%, AUC of 91.85% and recall of 86.35%. And for nervous system target drugs, GCN technique achieved an accuracy of 95.27%, precision of 88.36%, F1-Score of 86.49%, AUC of 88.83% and recall of 84.73%. This research provides a significant contribution to pharmacovigilance by proposing a data-driven method to detect and reduce polypharmacy side effects, thereby increasing patient safety and healthcare decision-making.
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.