Using Information Mining of the Medical Literature to Improve Drug Safety

Published in: JAMIA, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, v. 18, no. 5, Sep. 2011, p. 668-674

Posted on on May 05, 2011

by Kanaka Shetty, Siddhartha Dalal

Read More

Access further information on this document at JAMIA

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: Prescription drugs can be associated with adverse effects (AEs) that are unrecognized despite evidence in the medical literature, as shown by rofecoxib's late recall in 2004. We assessed whether applying information mining to PubMed could reveal major drug–AE associations if articles testing whether drugs cause AEs are over-represented in the literature. DESIGN: MEDLINE citations published between 1949 and September 2009 were retrieved if they mentioned one of 38 drugs and one of 55 AEs. A statistical document classifier (using MeSH index terms) was constructed to remove irrelevant articles unlikely to test whether a drug caused an AE. The remaining relevant articles were analyzed using a disproportionality analysis that identified drug–AE associations (signals of disproportionate reporting) using step-up procedures developed to control the familywise type I error rate. MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) for empirical drug–AE associations as judged against drug–AE associations subject to FDA warnings. RESULTS: In testing, the statistical document classifier identified relevant articles with 81% sensitivity and 87% PPV. Using data filtered by the statistical document classifier, base-case models showed 64.9% sensitivity and 42.4% PPV for detecting FDA warnings. Base-case models discovered 54% of all detected FDA warnings using literature published before warnings. For example, the rofecoxib–heart disease association was evident using literature published before 2002. Analyses incorporating literature mentioning AEs common to the drug class of interest yielded 71.4% sensitivity and 40.7% PPV. CONCLUSIONS: Results from large-scale literature retrieval and analysis (literature mining) compared favorably with and could complement current drug safety methods.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.