ArticleScientific reports2026
Signal detection of adverse events in medical devices using natural language processing: a case study in pelvic mesh.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Disproportionality analysis is used to detect safety signals for post-market surveillance from adverse events reported to regulatory bodies but is challenging when reports contain unstructured free-text. We implemented a proof-of-concept system combining natural language processing of free-text data with disproportionality analysis, using a known safety signal from pelvic mesh. Free-text reports in an Australian spontaneous adverse event report database between 2012 and 2017 were classified using topic modelling. 'Pain' was the most frequent clinical topic and was a known adverse event from pelvic mesh. Signal detection with three different comparators (hernia mesh, hernia and other mesh and all other devices) was performed every quarter with three disproportionality methods (Proportional Reporting Ratio, Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network and maximised Sequential Probability Ratio Test). All methods adjusted the Type I error threshold for multiple looks at the data. A safety signal for pelvic mesh compared with hernia and other mesh was detected by all three methods in 3rd quarter of 2014, three years before the device was withdrawn from Australia in November 2017. Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network most reliably accounted for uncertainty in the pain classification. Further investigation is required with other devices and databases to validate our proof-of-concept system.
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.