ArticleNPJ digital medicine2024
Phenotyping people with a history of injecting drug use within electronic medical records using an interactive machine learning approach.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Harmonizing self-reported and free text medication data: a reproducible pipeline for gerontological research.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Hepatitis C Virus-Pediatric and Adult Perspectives in the Current Decade.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
People with a history of injecting drug use are a priority for eliminating blood-borne viruses and sexually transmissible infections. Identifying them for disease surveillance in electronic medical records (EMRs) is challenged by sparsity of predictors. This study introduced a novel approach to phenotype people who have injected drugs using structured EMR data and interactive human-in-the-loop methods. We iteratively trained random forest classifiers removing important features and adding new positive labels each time. The initial model achieved 92.7% precision and 93.5% recall. Models maintained >90% precision and recall after nine iterations, revealing combinations of less obvious features influencing predictions. Applied to approximately 1.7 million patients, the final model identified 128,704 (7.7%) patients as potentially having injected drugs, beyond the 50,510 (2.9%) with known indicators of injecting drug use. This process produced explainable models that revealed otherwise hidden combinations of predictors, offering an adaptive approach to addressing the inherent challenge of inconsistently missing data in EMRs.
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.