Artificial intelligence (AI) in pharmacovigilance: A systematic review on predicting adverse drug reactions (ADR) in hospitalized patients.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Viola Savy Dsouza, Lada Leyens, Jestina Rachel Kurian, Angela Brand, Helmut Brand
{"title":"Artificial intelligence (AI) in pharmacovigilance: A systematic review on predicting adverse drug reactions (ADR) in hospitalized patients.","authors":"Viola Savy Dsouza, Lada Leyens, Jestina Rachel Kurian, Angela Brand, Helmut Brand","doi":"10.1016/j.sapharm.2025.02.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) significantly impact healthcare systems, leading to increased hospitalization rates and costs. With the growing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, machine learning (ML) models offer promising solutions for ADR prediction. However, comprehensive evaluations of these models remain limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review synthesized findings from 13 studies that utilized various ML algorithms (regression-based, flexible, and ensemble models) to predict ADRs using data such as patient demographics, laboratory values, and comorbidities. Meta-analysis was conducted to assess the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the models, and a co-authorship and keyword analysis was performed to examine collaborative networks within the field.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The included studies primarily focused on model development (77 %), with only 23 % incorporating external validation, raising concerns about generalizability across clinical contexts. Meta-analysis showed pooled sensitivity and specificity of 78.1 % and 70.6 % for development-only studies, while studies with external validation achieved higher sensitivity (81.5 %) and specificity (79.5 %). Co-authorship analysis identified 67 contributors across eight collaboration clusters, indicating a specialized but emerging research field.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The findings highlight the need for multifactorial models that integrate diverse predictors to improve the performance and reliability of ML-based ADR prediction. Addressing these limitations through rigorous model development and validation processes could enhance the clinical applicability of AI-driven pharmacovigilance, ultimately advancing patient safety and healthcare outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48126,"journal":{"name":"Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2025.02.008","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) significantly impact healthcare systems, leading to increased hospitalization rates and costs. With the growing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, machine learning (ML) models offer promising solutions for ADR prediction. However, comprehensive evaluations of these models remain limited.

Methods: This systematic review synthesized findings from 13 studies that utilized various ML algorithms (regression-based, flexible, and ensemble models) to predict ADRs using data such as patient demographics, laboratory values, and comorbidities. Meta-analysis was conducted to assess the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the models, and a co-authorship and keyword analysis was performed to examine collaborative networks within the field.

Results: The included studies primarily focused on model development (77 %), with only 23 % incorporating external validation, raising concerns about generalizability across clinical contexts. Meta-analysis showed pooled sensitivity and specificity of 78.1 % and 70.6 % for development-only studies, while studies with external validation achieved higher sensitivity (81.5 %) and specificity (79.5 %). Co-authorship analysis identified 67 contributors across eight collaboration clusters, indicating a specialized but emerging research field.

Discussion: The findings highlight the need for multifactorial models that integrate diverse predictors to improve the performance and reliability of ML-based ADR prediction. Addressing these limitations through rigorous model development and validation processes could enhance the clinical applicability of AI-driven pharmacovigilance, ultimately advancing patient safety and healthcare outcomes.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy
Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
225
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy (RSAP) is a quarterly publication featuring original scientific reports and comprehensive review articles in the social and administrative pharmaceutical sciences. Topics of interest include outcomes evaluation of products, programs, or services; pharmacoepidemiology; medication adherence; direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medications; disease state management; health systems reform; drug marketing; medication distribution systems such as e-prescribing; web-based pharmaceutical/medical services; drug commerce and re-importation; and health professions workforce issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信