Abstract
Objective Research on pharmacovigilance from social media data has focused on mining adverse drug effects (ADEs) using annotated datasets, with publications generally focusing on one of three tasks: (i) ADE classification, (ii) named entity recognition (NER) for identifying the span of an ADE mentions, and (iii) ADE mention normalization to standardized vocabularies. While the common goal of such systems is to detect ADE signals that can be used to inform public policy, it has been impeded largely by limited end-to-end solutions to the three tasks for large-scale analysis of social media reports for different drugs.
Materials and Methods We present a dataset for training and evaluation of ADE pipelines where the ADE distribution is closer to the average ‘natural balance’ with ADEs present in about 7% of the Tweets. The deep learning architecture involves an ADE extraction pipeline with individual components for all three tasks.
Results The system presented achieved a classification performance of F1 = 0.63, span extraction performance of F1 = 0.44 and an end-to-end entity resolution performance of F1 = 0.34 on the presented dataset.
Discussion The performance of the models continue to highlight multiple challenges when deploying pharmacovigilance systems that use social media data. We discuss the implications of such models in the downstream tasks of signal detection and suggest future enhancements.
Conclusion Mining ADEs from Twitter posts using a pipeline architecture requires the different components to be trained and tuned based on input data imbalance in order to ensure optimal performance on the end-to-end resolution task.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Library of Medicine (NLM) grant R01LM011176 awarded to GG. The work at Kazan Federal University was supported by the Russian Science Foundation [grant number 18-11-00284].
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Pennsylvania reviewed the studies for which this data was collected and deemed them exempt human subjects research under category (4) of paragraph (b) of the US Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Section 46.101 for publicly available data sources (45 CFR 46.101(b)(4)).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
elvtutubalina{at}kpfu.ru, zulfatmi{at}gmail.com, ISAlimova{at}kpfu.ru, a.r.dirkson{at}liacs.leidenuniv.nl, s.verberne{at}liacs.leidenuniv.nl, dweissen{at}pennmedicine.upenn.edu, gragon{at}pennmedicine.upenn.edu
Data Availability
All training data used in the manuscript and binaries of the system in the article will be made available on the center's website.