Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

A systematic approach for developing a corpus of patient reported adverse drug events: : A case study for SSRI and SNRI medications

Published: 01 February 2019 Publication History

Graphical abstract

Display Omitted

Highlights

We introduce PsyTAR, a corpus of patient expressions of effectiveness and adverse drug events (ADEs) associated with psychiatric medications.
We show that following a systematic approach can significantly improve inter-annotator agreement.
We show that psychological ADEs, cognitive ADEs, and functional problems have higher semantic variability than physiological ADEs and drug indications.
We show that PsyTAR has important implications in improving the performance of text mining and machine learning algorithms in identifying ADEs.

Abstract

“Psychiatric Treatment Adverse Reactions” (PsyTAR) corpus is an annotated corpus that has been developed using patients narrative data for psychiatric medications, particularly SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor) and SNRIs (Serotonin Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitor) medications. This corpus consists of three main components: sentence classification, entity identification, and entity normalization. We split the review posts into sentences and labeled them for presence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) (2168 sentences), withdrawal symptoms (WDs) (438 sentences), sign/symptoms/illness (SSIs) (789 sentences), drug indications (517), drug effectiveness (EF) (1087 sentences), and drug infectiveness (INF) (337 sentences). In the entity identification phase, we identified and extracted ADRs (4813 mentions), WDs (590 mentions), SSIs (1219 mentions), and DIs (792). In the entity normalization phase, we mapped the identified entities to the corresponding concepts in both UMLS (918 unique concepts) and SNOMED CT (755 unique concepts). Four annotators double coded the sentences and the span of identified entities by strictly following guidelines rules developed for this study. We used the PsyTAR sentence classification component to automatically train a range of supervised machine learning classifiers to identifying text segments with the mentions of ADRs, WDs, DIs, SSIs, EF, and INF. SVMs classifiers had the highest performance with F-Score 0.90. We also measured performance of the cTAKES (clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System) in identifying patients’ expressions of ADRs and WDs with and without adding PsyTAR dictionary to the core dictionary of cTAKES. Augmenting cTAKES dictionary with PsyTAR improved the F-score cTAKES by 25%. The findings imply that PsyTAR has significant implications for text mining algorithms aimed to identify information about adverse drug events and drug effectiveness from patients’ narratives data, by linking the patients’ expressions of adverse drug events to medical standard vocabularies. The corpus is publicly available at Zolnoori et al. [30].

References

[1]
J. Aronson, Bottled lightning, BMJ 331 (7520) (2005) 824.
[2]
A. Benton, L. Ungar, S. Hill, S. Hennessy, J. Mao, A. Chung, J.H. Holmes, Identifying potential adverse effects using the web: a new approach to medical hypothesis generation, J. Biomed. Inform. 44 (6) (2011) 989–996.
[3]
J. Charan, T. Biswas, How to calculate sample size for different study designs in medical research?, Indian J. Psychol. Med. 35 (2) (2013) 121–126,.
[4]
S. Golder, G. Norman, Y.K. Loke, Systematic review on the prevalence, frequency and comparative value of adverse events data in social media, Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 80 (4) (2015) 878–888.
[5]
H. Gurulingappa, R. Klinger, M. Hofmann-Apitius, J. Fluck, An empirical evaluation of resources for the identification of diseases and adverse effects in biomedical literature. Paper presented at the 2nd Workshop on Building and evaluating resources for biomedical text mining (7th edition of the Language Resources and Evaluation Conference), 2010.
[6]
H. Gurulingappa, A. Mateen-Rajput, L. Toldo, Extraction of potential adverse drug events from medical case reports, J. Biomed. Semantics 3 (1) (2012) 15.
[7]
H. Gurulingappa, A.M. Rajput, A. Roberts, J. Fluck, M. Hofmann-Apitius, L. Toldo, Development of a benchmark corpus to support the automatic extraction of drug-related adverse effects from medical case reports, J. Biomed. Inform. 45 (5) (2012) 885–892.
[8]
T. Hrenchir, 10 Most-Prescribed Antidepressant Medications. Retrieved from https://www.newsmax.com/health/health-wire/most-prescribed-antidepressant-medications/2015/09/02/id/673123/, 2017.
[9]
T. Huynh, Y. He, A. Willis, S. Rüger, Adverse drug reaction classification with deep neural networks, 2016.
[10]
T. Huynh, Y. He, A. Willis, S. Rüger, Adverse drug reaction classification with deep neural networks. Paper presented at the Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers, 2016.
[11]
S. Karimi, A. Metke-Jimenez, M. Kemp, C. Wang, CADEC: a corpus of adverse drug event annotations, J. Biomed. Inform. 55 (2015) 73–81.
[12]
M. Kuhn, I. Letunic, L.J. Jensen, P. Bork, The SIDER database of drugs and side effects, Nucleic Acids Res. 44 (D1) (2015) D1075–D1079.
[13]
J.R. Landis, G.G. Koch, The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data, Biometrics (1977) 159–174.
[14]
R. Leaman, L. Wojtulewicz, R. Sullivan, A. Skariah, J. Yang, G. Gonzalez, Towards internet-age pharmacovigilance: extracting adverse drug reactions from user posts to health-related social networks, Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 2010 Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing, 2010.
[15]
J. Leskovec, A. Rajaraman, J.D. Ullman, Mining of Massive Datasets, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[16]
X. Liu, H. Chen, AZDrugMiner: an information extraction system for mining patient-reported adverse drug events in online patient forums, in: Smart Health, Springer, 2013, pp. 134–150.
[17]
F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, V. Dubourg, Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12 (Oct) (2011) 2825–2830.
[18]
L.A. Pratt, D.J. Brody, Q. Gu, 2017. Antidepressant Use Among Persons Aged 12 and Over: United States, 2011–2014. NCHS data brief (283), 1–8.
[19]
R.P. Rajkumar, G. Melvin, Pharmacovigilance for psychiatrists: an introduction, Indian J. Psychiatry 56 (2) (2014) 176.
[20]
A. Sarker, R. Ginn, A. Nikfarjam, K. O’Connor, K. Smith, S. Jayaraman, G. Gonzalez, Utilizing social media data for pharmacovigilance: a review, J. Biomed. Inform. 54 (2015) 202–212.
[21]
A. Sarker, G. Gonzalez, Portable automatic text classification for adverse drug reaction detection via multi-corpus training, J. Biomed. Inform. 53 (2015) 196–207.
[22]
G.K. Savova, J.J. Masanz, P.V. Ogren, J. Zheng, S. Sohn, K.C. Kipper-Schuler, C.G. Chute, Mayo clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System (cTAKES): architecture, component evaluation and applications, J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 17 (5) (2010) 507–513.
[23]
H. Schouten, Measuring pairwise agreement among many observers, Biometrical J. 22 (6) (1980) 497–504.
[24]
C.A. Smith, P.Z. Stavri, Consumer health vocabulary, in: Consumer Health Informatics, Springer, 2005, pp. 122–128.
[25]
D. Tallon, N. Wiles, J. Campbell, C. Chew-Graham, C. Dickens, U. Macleod, S. Gilbody, Mirtazapine added to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for treatment-resistant depression in primary care (MIR trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial, Trials 17 (1) (2016) 66.
[26]
R. Uher, A. Farmer, N. Henigsberg, M. Rietschel, O. Mors, W. Maier, A. Placentino, Adverse reactions to antidepressants, Br. J. Psychiatry 195 (3) (2009) 202–210.
[27]
S. Winters-Hilt, A. Yelundur, C. McChesney, M. Landry, Support vector machine implementations for classification & clustering. Paper presented at the BMC bioinformatics, 2006.
[28]
C.C. Yang, H. Yang, L. Jiang, M. Zhang, Social media mining for drug safety signal detection, Paper Presented at the Proceedings of the 2012 International Workshop on Smart Health and Wellbeing, 2012.
[29]
M. Zolnoori, K.W. Fung, P. Fontelo, H. Kharrazi, A. Faiola, Y.S.S. Wu, V. Stoffel, T. Patrick, Identifying the Underlying Factors Associated With Patients’ Attitudes Toward Antidepressants: Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Patient Drug Reviews, JMIR mental health 5 (4) (2018) p.e10726.
[30]
M. Zolnoori, K.W. Fung, T.B. Patrick, P. Fontelo, H. Kharrazi, A. Faiola, et al., (submitted). The PsyTAR dataset: From Social Media Posts to a Corpus of Adverse Drug Events and Effectiveness of Psychiatric Medications. Data in Brief.
[31]
M. Zolnoori, T. Patrick, K.W. Fung, P. Fontelo, A. Faiola, Y.S.S. Wu, K. Xu, J. Zhu, C.E. Eldredge, Development of an Adverse Drug Reaction Corpus from Consumer Health Posts for Psychiatric Medications, SMM4H@AMIA, Washington DC, 2017.
[32]
M. Zolnoori, Utilizing Consumer Health Posts for Pharmacovigilance: Identifying Underlying Factors Associated with Patients’ Attitudes Towards Antidepressants, Doctoral Dissertation, 2017. Retrieved from University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Digital Library https://dc.uwm.edu/etd/1733/.

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)Selection of Pseudo-Annotated Data for Adverse Drug Reaction Classification Across Drug GroupsAnalysis of Images, Social Networks and Texts10.1007/978-3-031-16500-9_4(37-44)Online publication date: 16-Dec-2021

Index Terms

  1. A systematic approach for developing a corpus of patient reported adverse drug events: A case study for SSRI and SNRI medications
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Information & Contributors

        Information

        Published In

        cover image Journal of Biomedical Informatics
        Journal of Biomedical Informatics  Volume 90, Issue C
        Feb 2019
        118 pages

        Publisher

        Elsevier Science

        San Diego, CA, United States

        Publication History

        Published: 01 February 2019

        Author Tags

        1. Annotated corpus
        2. Adverse drug events
        3. Drug effectiveness
        4. Online healthcare forums
        5. Patients narratives
        6. Psychiatric medications
        7. SSRIs
        8. SNRIs
        9. Drug safety
        10. Social media
        11. Information extraction
        12. Semantic mapping
        13. SNOMED CT
        14. UMLS
        15. Text mining
        16. Machine learning

        Qualifiers

        • Research-article

        Contributors

        Other Metrics

        Bibliometrics & Citations

        Bibliometrics

        Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
        Reflects downloads up to 26 Jan 2025

        Other Metrics

        Citations

        Cited By

        View all
        • (2021)Selection of Pseudo-Annotated Data for Adverse Drug Reaction Classification Across Drug GroupsAnalysis of Images, Social Networks and Texts10.1007/978-3-031-16500-9_4(37-44)Online publication date: 16-Dec-2021

        View Options

        View options

        Figures

        Tables

        Media

        Share

        Share

        Share this Publication link

        Share on social media