ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026
Using Natural Language Processing to Identify Adverse Drug Events Characterized by Medication Replacement in Primary Care Electronic Medical Records: Algorithm and Validation Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Health care systems generate vast amounts of unstructured text, such as clinical notes, which capture nuanced patient experiences, clinical reasoning, and subtle indicators of health status. While health system research has traditionally relied upon structured data, natural language processing (NLP) enables the extraction of this rich textual information. Leveraging NLP could improve the identification and characterization of underreported adverse drug events (ADEs). Objective: The primary objective of this study was to train and evaluate multiple NLP models, including both previously published architectures and a novel model, for the identification of ADEs from clinical notes. Methods: Electronic medical records from the Manitoba Primary Care Research Network (MaPCReN) were used in this study. Clinical notes were annotated to indicate the presence of a possible ADE, the associated words or phrases, and the corresponding drug. A subselection algorithm was applied to ensure sufficient representation of notes containing ADEs for training a robust classifier. The cohort was restricted to patients aged 55 years and older and was annotated in 2 waves: Wave 1 comprised primary care encounter notes selected for a temporally linked emergency department (ED) visit, enriching it for acute presentations, while Wave 2 relaxed this requirement, and its acuity composition was uncharacterized. The annotated data were split into training and test sets. NLP models-including BioBERT, BlueBERT, a large language model (LLM) classifier, and an LLM embeddings-based classifier-were trained on both original clinical notes and notes reformatted into Subjective-Objective-Assessment-Plan (SOAP) structure. To approximate a clinician-inspired reasoning workflow, Mistral-7b-Instruct was used to extract presenting symptoms and generate a ranked list of potential etiologies. Model performance was evaluated using precision, recall, and F1-score. Results: Of the 1085 annotated encounter notes, 355 included ADEs. Across 9 modeling approaches evaluated over 5 random seeds, models trained on SOAP-rewritten notes generally outperformed those trained on original notes. The SOAP Rewrite+ LLM Embeddings Classifier (GritLM-SOAP) achieved the highest mean F1-score (72.53%; 95% CI 62.40%-81.82%), while BioBERT-SOAP weighted achieved the highest mean recall (76.34%; 95% CI 62.69%-89.66%). End-to-end span-level extraction (named entity recognition+relation extraction) on ADE-positive test notes achieved a mean relaxed F1-score of 0.455, with relation extraction identified as the bottleneck. Conclusions: Effective detection of ADEs in clinical notes may benefit from NLP models that approximate the clinical reasoning of health care providers. While the SOAP Rewrite+ LLM Embeddings Classifier demonstrated a reasonable balance of precision and recall, there is room for improvement as models evolve.
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.