| Literature DB >> 29897321 |
Shashank Gupta1, Sachin Pawar2, Nitin Ramrakhiyani3,2, Girish Keshav Palshikar2, Vasudeva Varma3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social media is a useful platform to share health-related information due to its vast reach. This makes it a good candidate for public-health monitoring tasks, specifically for pharmacovigilance. We study the problem of extraction of Adverse-Drug-Reaction (ADR) mentions from social media, particularly from Twitter. Medical information extraction from social media is challenging, mainly due to short and highly informal nature of text, as compared to more technical and formal medical reports.Entities:
Keywords: Pharmacovigilance; Recurrent neural networks; Semi-supervised learning
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29897321 PMCID: PMC5998760 DOI: 10.1186/s12859-018-2192-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Bioinformatics ISSN: 1471-2105 Impact factor: 3.169
Fig. 1Overall System Diagram System diagram illustrating the connection between unsupervised learning and supervised learning phase
Performance of various deep neural network methods on ADR extraction task
| Method | F1-Score | Precision | Recall |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.729 ±0.027 | 0.695 ±0.109 |
| |
| Baseline (with adam optimizer) | 0.737 ±0.308 | 0.707 ±0.096 | 0.774 ±0.08 |
| Semi-Supervised ADR extraction | 0.774 ±0.073 |
⋆Indicate statistical significant (p≤0.05) using paired t-tests compared to the baseline
Highlighted portions reflect the best results across the respective column
Performance comparison of Semi-Supervised bi-LSTM (SS-BLSTM) under different word embedding initialization settings and different unlabeled data settings. Results are reported averaged over 30 trials along with the std. deviation
| Method | F1-Score | Precision | Recall |
|---|---|---|---|
| SS-BLSTM (with drug mask removed) |
| 0.723 ±0.106 |
|
| SS-BLSTM (with labeled tweets dictionary only) | 0.745 ±0.039 |
| 0.769 ±0.097 |
| SS-BLSTM (with GoogleNews [ | 0.736 ±0.031 | 0.708 ±0.095 | 0.774 ±0.118 |
| SS-BLSTM (with medical embeddings) | 0.673 ±0.021 | 0.642 ±0.089 | 0.716 ±0.118 |
Highlighted portions reflect the best results across the respective columns