Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39156048›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2024

Development of a text mining algorithm for identifying adverse drug reactions in electronic health records.

Britt W M van de Burgt, Arthur T M Wasylewicz, Bjorn Dullemond, Naomi T Jessurun, Rene J E Grouls, R Arthur Bouwman, Erik H M Korsten, Toine C G Egberts

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Britt W M van de BurgtDivision of Clinical Pharmacy, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, 5623 EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6882-3586
Arthur T M WasylewiczDivision Healthcare Intelligence, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, 5623 EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Bjorn DullemondDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical University Eindhoven, 5612 AP Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Naomi T JessurunNetherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre LAREB, 5237 MH 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.
Rene J E GroulsDivision of Clinical Pharmacy, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, 5623 EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
R Arthur BouwmanDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Signal Processing Group, Technical University Eindhoven, 5612 AP Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Erik H M KorstenDivision Healthcare Intelligence, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, 5623 EJ Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Toine C G EgbertsDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a significant healthcare concern. They are often documented as free text in electronic health records (EHRs), making them challenging to use in clinical decision support systems (CDSS). The study aimed to develop a text mining algorithm to identify ADRs in free text of Dutch EHRs. Materials and Methods: In Phase I, our previously developed CDSS algorithm was recoded and improved upon with the same relatively large dataset of 35 000 notes (Step A), using R to identify possible ADRs with Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terms and the related Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED-CT) (Step B). In Phase II, 6 existing text-mining R-scripts were used to detect and present unique ADRs, and positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity were observed. Results: In Phase IA, the recoded algorithm performed better than the previously developed CDSS algorithm, resulting in a PPV of 13% and a sensitivity of 93%. For The sensitivity for serious ADRs was 95%. The algorithm identified 58 additional possible ADRs. In Phase IB, the algorithm achieved a PPV of 10%, a sensitivity of 86%, and an F-measure of 0.18. In Phase II, four R-scripts enhanced the sensitivity and PPV of the algorithm, resulting in a PPV of 70%, a sensitivity of 73%, an F-measure of 0.71, and a 63% sensitivity for serious ADRs. Discussion and Conclusion: The recoded Dutch algorithm effectively identifies ADRs from free-text Dutch EHRs using R-scripts and MedDRA/SNOMED-CT. The study details its limitations, highlighting the algorithm's potential and significant improvements.

Indexed as

adverse drug reactionclinical decision support systemselectronic health recordfree-textnatural language processingtext mining

Identifiers

PMID39156048
PMCPMC11328534

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.