IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v43y2020i8d10.1007_s40264-020-00942-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prospective Evaluation of Adverse Event Recognition Systems in Twitter: Results from the Web-RADR Project

Author

Listed:
  • Lucie M. Gattepaille

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

  • Sara Hedfors Vidlin

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

  • Tomas Bergvall

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

  • Carrie E. Pierce

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

  • Johan Ellenius

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

Abstract

Introduction A large number of studies on systems to detect and sometimes normalize adverse events (AEs) in social media have been published, but evidence of their practical utility is scarce. This raises the question of the transferability of such systems to new settings. Objectives The aims of this study were to develop an AE recognition system, prospectively evaluate its performance on an external benchmark dataset and identify potential factors influencing the transferability of AE recognition systems. Methods A pipeline based on dictionary lookups and logistic regression classifiers was developed using a proprietary dataset of 196,533 Tweets manually annotated for AE relations and prospectively evaluated the system on the publicly available WEB-RADR reference dataset, exploring different aspects affecting transferability. Results Our system achieved 0.53 precision, 0.52 recall and 0.52 F1-score on the development test set; however, when applied to the WEB-RADR reference dataset, system performance dropped to 0.38 precision, 0.20 recall and 0.26 F1-score. Similarly, a previously published method aiming at automatically detecting adverse event posts reported 0.5 precision, 0.92 recall and 0.65 F1-score on thus another dataset, while performance on the WEB-RADR reference dataset was reduced to 0.37 precision, 0.63 recall and 0.46 F1-score. We identified four potential factors leading to poor transferability: overfitting, selection bias, label bias and prevalence. Conclusion We warn the community about a potentially large discrepancy between the expected performance of automated AE recognition systems based on published results and the actual observed performance on independent data. This study highlights the difficulty of implementing an all-purpose system for automatic adverse event recognition in Twitter, which could explain the lack of such systems in practical pharmacovigilance settings. Our recommendation is to use benchmark independent datasets, such as the WEB-RADR reference, to investigate the transferability of the adverse event recognition systems and ultimately enforce rigorous comparisons across studies on the task.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucie M. Gattepaille & Sara Hedfors Vidlin & Tomas Bergvall & Carrie E. Pierce & Johan Ellenius, 2020. "Prospective Evaluation of Adverse Event Recognition Systems in Twitter: Results from the Web-RADR Project," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(8), pages 797-808, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:8:d:10.1007_s40264-020-00942-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-020-00942-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-020-00942-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-020-00942-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gregory E. Powell & Harry A. Seifert & Tjark Reblin & Phil J. Burstein & James Blowers & J. Alan Menius & Jeffery L. Painter & Michele Thomas & Carrie E. Pierce & Harold W. Rodriguez & John S. Brownst, 2016. "Social Media Listening for Routine Post-Marketing Safety Surveillance," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 39(5), pages 443-454, May.
    2. Maxim Topaz & Kenneth Lai & Neil Dhopeshwarkar & Diane L. Seger & Roee Sa’adon & Foster Goss & Ronen Rozenblum & Li Zhou, 2016. "Clinicians’ Reports in Electronic Health Records Versus Patients’ Concerns in Social Media: A Pilot Study of Adverse Drug Reactions of Aspirin and Atorvastatin," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 241-250, March.
    3. Rave Harpaz & Alison Callahan & Suzanne Tamang & Yen Low & David Odgers & Sam Finlayson & Kenneth Jung & Paea LePendu & Nigam Shah, 2014. "Text Mining for Adverse Drug Events: the Promise, Challenges, and State of the Art," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 37(10), pages 777-790, October.
    4. Stephen Wu & Timothy Miller & James Masanz & Matt Coarr & Scott Halgrim & David Carrell & Cheryl Clark, 2014. "Negation’s Not Solved: Generalizability Versus Optimizability in Clinical Natural Language Processing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-11, November.
    5. Ola Caster & Juergen Dietrich & Marie-Laure Kürzinger & Magnus Lerch & Simon Maskell & G. Niklas Norén & Stéphanie Tcherny-Lessenot & Benoit Vroman & Antoni Wisniewski & John Stekelenborg, 2018. "Assessment of the Utility of Social Media for Broad-Ranging Statistical Signal Detection in Pharmacovigilance: Results from the WEB-RADR Project," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 41(12), pages 1355-1369, December.
    6. Carrie E. Pierce & Khaled Bouri & Carol Pamer & Scott Proestel & Harold W. Rodriguez & Hoa Le & Clark C. Freifeld & John S. Brownstein & Mark Walderhaug & I. Ralph Edwards & Nabarun Dasgupta, 2017. "Evaluation of Facebook and Twitter Monitoring to Detect Safety Signals for Medical Products: An Analysis of Recent FDA Safety Alerts," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 317-331, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Susan Colilla & Elad Yom Tov & Ling Zhang & Marie-Laure Kurzinger & Stephanie Tcherny-Lessenot & Catherine Penfornis & Shang Jen & Danny S. Gonzalez & Patrick Caubel & Susan Welsh & Juhaeri Juhaeri, 2017. "Validation of New Signal Detection Methods for Web Query Log Data Compared to Signal Detection Algorithms Used With FAERS," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 399-408, May.
    2. Yiqing Zhao & Yue Yu & Hanyin Wang & Yikuan Li & Yu Deng & Guoqian Jiang & Yuan Luo, 2022. "Machine Learning in Causal Inference: Application in Pharmacovigilance," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 459-476, May.
    3. Eyal Eckhaus & Zachary Sheaffer, 2018. "Managerial hubris detection: the case of Enron," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(4), pages 304-325, November.
    4. Cedric Bousquet & Bissan Audeh & Florelle Bellet & Agnès Lillo-Le Louët, 2018. "Comment on “Assessment of the Utility of Social Media for Broad-Ranging Statistical Signal Detection in Pharmacovigilance: Results from the WEB-RADR Project”," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 41(12), pages 1371-1373, December.
    5. Camille Goyer & Genaro Castillon & Yola Moride, 2022. "Implementation of Interventions and Policies on Opioids and Awareness of Opioid-Related Harms in Canada: A Multistage Mixed Methods Descriptive Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-12, April.
    6. Yuan Luo & William K. Thompson & Timothy M. Herr & Zexian Zeng & Mark A. Berendsen & Siddhartha R. Jonnalagadda & Matthew B. Carson & Justin Starren, 2017. "Natural Language Processing for EHR-Based Pharmacovigilance: A Structured Review," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 40(11), pages 1075-1089, November.
    7. Bissan Audeh & Florelle Bellet & Marie-Noëlle Beyens & Agnès Lillo-Le Louët & Cédric Bousquet, 2020. "Use of Social Media for Pharmacovigilance Activities: Key Findings and Recommendations from the Vigi4Med Project," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(9), pages 835-851, September.
    8. Juergen Dietrich & Lucie M. Gattepaille & Britta Anne Grum & Letitia Jiri & Magnus Lerch & Daniele Sartori & Antoni Wisniewski, 2020. "Adverse Events in Twitter-Development of a Benchmark Reference Dataset: Results from IMI WEB-RADR," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 467-478, May.
    9. IOSIF, Alina Natalia & GURGU, ELENA, 2019. "Provisions Concerning The Organization Of Events For The Promotion Of Products On The Pharmaceutical Market In Romania," Annals of Spiru Haret University, Economic Series, Universitatea Spiru Haret, vol. 19(3), pages 111-126.
    10. Ying Li & Antonio Jimeno Yepes & Cao Xiao, 2020. "Combining Social Media and FDA Adverse Event Reporting System to Detect Adverse Drug Reactions," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(9), pages 893-903, September.
    11. Corina Buzoianu & Monica Bîră, 2021. "Using Social Media Listening in Crisis Communication and Management: New Methods and Practices for Looking into Crises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    12. Sabine Brosch & Anne-Marie Ferran & Victoria Newbould & Diane Farkas & Marina Lengsavath & Phil Tregunno, 2019. "Establishing a Framework for the Use of Social Media in Pharmacovigilance in Europe," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 42(8), pages 921-930, August.
    13. Tavpritesh Sethi & Nigam H. Shah, 2017. "Pharmacovigilance Using Textual Data: The Need to Go Deeper and Wider into the Con(text)," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 40(11), pages 1047-1048, November.
    14. Galit Klein & Eyal Eckhaus, 2017. "Sensemaking and sensegiving as predicting organizational crisis," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(3), pages 225-244, August.
    15. Karen Smith & Su Golder & Abeed Sarker & Yoon Loke & Karen O’Connor & Graciela Gonzalez-Hernandez, 2018. "Methods to Compare Adverse Events in Twitter to FAERS, Drug Information Databases, and Systematic Reviews: Proof of Concept with Adalimumab," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 41(12), pages 1397-1410, December.
    16. Gianluca Trifirò & Janet Sultana & Andrew Bate, 2018. "From Big Data to Smart Data for Pharmacovigilance: The Role of Healthcare Databases and Other Emerging Sources," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 143-149, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:8:d:10.1007_s40264-020-00942-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.