Abeed Sarker1, Rachel Ginn2, Azadeh Nikfarjam2, Karen O'Connor2, Karen Smith3, Swetha Jayaraman4, Tejaswi Upadhaya4, Graciela Gonzalez2. 1. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Arizona State University, Scottsdale, AZ, United States. Electronic address: abeed.sarker@asu.edu. 2. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Arizona State University, Scottsdale, AZ, United States. 3. Rueckert-Hartman College for Health Professions, Regis University, Denver, CO, United States. 4. School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Automatic monitoring of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs), defined as adverse patient outcomes caused by medications, is a challenging research problem that is currently receiving significant attention from the medical informatics community. In recent years, user-posted data on social media, primarily due to its sheer volume, has become a useful resource for ADR monitoring. Research using social media data has progressed using various data sources and techniques, making it difficult to compare distinct systems and their performances. In this paper, we perform a methodical review to characterize the different approaches to ADR detection/extraction from social media, and their applicability to pharmacovigilance. In addition, we present a potential systematic pathway to ADR monitoring from social media. METHODS: We identified studies describing approaches for ADR detection from social media from the Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science databases, and the Google Scholar search engine. Studies that met our inclusion criteria were those that attempted to extract ADR information posted by users on any publicly available social media platform. We categorized the studies according to different characteristics such as primary ADR detection approach, size of corpus, data source(s), availability, and evaluation criteria. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies met our inclusion criteria, with fifteen (68%) published within the last two years. However, publicly available annotated data is still scarce, and we found only six studies that made the annotations used publicly available, making system performance comparisons difficult. In terms of algorithms, supervised classification techniques to detect posts containing ADR mentions, and lexicon-based approaches for extraction of ADR mentions from texts have been the most popular. CONCLUSION: Our review suggests that interest in the utilization of the vast amounts of available social media data for ADR monitoring is increasing. In terms of sources, both health-related and general social media data have been used for ADR detection-while health-related sources tend to contain higher proportions of relevant data, the volume of data from general social media websites is significantly higher. There is still very limited amount of annotated data publicly available , and, as indicated by the promising results obtained by recent supervised learning approaches, there is a strong need to make such data available to the research community.
OBJECTIVE: Automatic monitoring of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs), defined as adverse patient outcomes caused by medications, is a challenging research problem that is currently receiving significant attention from the medical informatics community. In recent years, user-posted data on social media, primarily due to its sheer volume, has become a useful resource for ADR monitoring. Research using social media data has progressed using various data sources and techniques, making it difficult to compare distinct systems and their performances. In this paper, we perform a methodical review to characterize the different approaches to ADR detection/extraction from social media, and their applicability to pharmacovigilance. In addition, we present a potential systematic pathway to ADR monitoring from social media. METHODS: We identified studies describing approaches for ADR detection from social media from the Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science databases, and the Google Scholar search engine. Studies that met our inclusion criteria were those that attempted to extract ADR information posted by users on any publicly available social media platform. We categorized the studies according to different characteristics such as primary ADR detection approach, size of corpus, data source(s), availability, and evaluation criteria. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies met our inclusion criteria, with fifteen (68%) published within the last two years. However, publicly available annotated data is still scarce, and we found only six studies that made the annotations used publicly available, making system performance comparisons difficult. In terms of algorithms, supervised classification techniques to detect posts containing ADR mentions, and lexicon-based approaches for extraction of ADR mentions from texts have been the most popular. CONCLUSION: Our review suggests that interest in the utilization of the vast amounts of available social media data for ADR monitoring is increasing. In terms of sources, both health-related and general social media data have been used for ADR detection-while health-related sources tend to contain higher proportions of relevant data, the volume of data from general social media websites is significantly higher. There is still very limited amount of annotated data publicly available , and, as indicated by the promising results obtained by recent supervised learning approaches, there is a strong need to make such data available to the research community.
Authors: Adrian Benton; Lyle Ungar; Shawndra Hill; Sean Hennessy; Jun Mao; Annie Chung; Charles E Leonard; John H Holmes Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2011-07-26 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Alan J Forster; Alison Jennings; Claire Chow; Ciera Leeder; Carl van Walraven Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: 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 Brownstein; Clark C Freifeld; Heidi G Bell; Nabarun Dasgupta Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Vladimir A Ivanisenko; Pavel S Demenkov; Timofey V Ivanisenko; Elena L Mishchenko; Olga V Saik Journal: BMC Bioinformatics Date: 2019-02-05 Impact factor: 3.169