Evidence mapPaperPMID 25800813Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2015

Ranking adverse drug reactions with crowdsourcing.

Assaf Gottlieb, Robert Hoehndorf, Michel Dumontier, Russ B Altman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Mapping of Crowdsourcing in Health: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Prioritizing research topics: a comparison of crowdsourcing and patient registry.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Assaf GottliebDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4904-631X

Funding

STANFORD COMPOSITE(RMI)U54HG004028 · NHGRI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MUSEN, MARK A · 2005 to 2014
$36.2M
PharmGKB: pharmacogenomics knowledge for precision medicineR24GM061374 · NIGMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ALTMAN, RUSS BIAGIO, KLEIN, TERI ELLEN · 2010 to 2018
$25.2M
THE STANFORD PHARMACOGENETICS KNOWLEDGE BASEU01GM061374 · NIGMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ALTMAN, RUSS BIAGIO · 2000 to 2009
$24.0M
Text Mining for High-fidelity Curation and Discovery of Gene-drug-phenotype RelationshipsR01LM005652 · NLM · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ALTMAN, RUSS BIAGIO · 2000 to 2018
$6.2M
Undergraduate Summer Research Experiences Support for Combining systems biology and structural biology to find new therapeuticsR01GM102365 · NIGMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ALTMAN, RUSS BIAGIO · 2012 to 2021
$3.0M
MODELING AND COMPUTING WITH UNCERTAIN STRUCTURESR29LM005652 · NLM · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ALTMAN, RUSS BIAGIO · 1994 to 1998
NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG004028NIGMS NIH HHS GM102365NIGMS NIH HHS GM61374NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM102365NIGMS NIH HHS R24 GM061374NIGMS NIH HHS U01 GM061374NLM NIH HHS LM05652NLM NIH HHS R01 LM005652
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is no publicly available resource that provides the relative severity of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Such a resource would be useful for several applications, including assessment of the risks and benefits of drugs and improvement of patient-centered care. It could also be used to triage predictions of drug adverse events.

objectiveThe intent of the study was to rank ADRs according to severity.

methodsWe used Internet-based crowdsourcing to rank ADRs according to severity. We assigned 126,512 pairwise comparisons of ADRs to 2589 Amazon Mechanical Turk workers and used these comparisons to rank order 2929 ADRs.

resultsThere is good correlation (rho=.53) between the mortality rates associated with ADRs and their rank. Our ranking highlights severe drug-ADR predictions, such as cardiovascular ADRs for raloxifene and celecoxib. It also triages genes associated with severe ADRs such as epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR), associated with glioblastoma multiforme, and SCN1A, associated with epilepsy.

conclusionsADR ranking lays a first stepping stone in personalized drug risk assessment. Ranking of ADRs using crowdsourcing may have useful clinical and financial implications, and should be further investigated in the context of health care decision making.

Indexed as

InternetAdultAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsCrowdsourcingDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHumansMalePatient-Centered CarePharmacovigilanceRisk Assessmentadverse drug reactionsalert fatiguecrowdsourcingdrug side effectspatient-centered carepharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID25800813
PMCPMC4387295

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.