Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40028543›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2025

A machine learning driven automated system to extract multiple information fields from safety data sheet documents.

Misbah Khan, Julia Penfield, Aatish Suman, Stephanie Crowell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Misbah KhanVelocityEHS, Chicago, USA.
Julia PenfieldVelocityEHS, Chicago, USA.
Aatish SumanVelocityEHS, Chicago, USA.
Stephanie CrowellVelocityEHS, Chicago, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Safety Data Sheets (SDS) provide essential safety and health information for various substances and products. They are widely used in industries that require cataloguing information on chemicals such as green chemistry, industrial hygiene, and regulatory compliance, among others within the Environment, Health, and Safety (EHS) and the Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) sectors. Over time, chemical data management has evolved from storing physical copies of SDS on work sites, to tabulating key fields from the SDS into a database, which is essential to successful inventory and chemical risk management. This process of extracting and structuring of essential information from SDS is known as SDS "indexing". SDS indexing is a critical task for inventory management and regulatory compliance, and is commonly done manually. Manual SDS indexing can be resource-intensive, as it requires personnel to process each document individually, often resulting in significant costs and extended processing times. Not all the fields from an SDS are always required to be indexed and the need is variant across companies and applications. However, there are 5 fields that are commonly needed across various applications and the process to extract them is referred to as "standard indexing". In this paper, we propose an automated system for standard indexing of SDS documents using a multi-step method with a combination of machine learning models and expert systems being executed sequentially. The system specifically extracts the fields Product Name, Product Code, Manufacturer Name, Supplier Name, and Revision Date. Our design achieves a precision range of 0.96-0.99 across the five fields, when evaluated on 150,000 SDS documents annotated for this purpose.

Identifiers

PMID40028543
PMCPMC11872447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.