基于人工智能查询建议的案例系列评估叙事搜索引擎。

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Alem Zekarias, Eva-Lisa Meldau, Shachi Bista, Joana Félix China, Lovisa Sandberg
{"title":"基于人工智能查询建议的案例系列评估叙事搜索引擎。","authors":"Alem Zekarias, Eva-Lisa Meldau, Shachi Bista, Joana Félix China, Lovisa Sandberg","doi":"10.1007/s40264-025-01529-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Manual identification of case narratives with specific relevant information can be challenging when working with large numbers of adverse event reports (case series). The process can be supported with a search engine, but building search queries often remains a manual task. Suggesting terms to add to the search query could support assessors in the identification of case narratives within a case series.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study is to explore the feasibility of identifying case narratives containing specific characteristics with a narrative search engine supported by artificial intelligence (AI) query suggestions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The narrative search engine uses Best Match 25 (BM25) and suggests additional query terms from two word embedding models providing English and biomedical words to a human in the loop. We calculated the percentage of relevant narratives retrieved by the system (recall) and the percentage of retrieved narratives relevant to the search (precision) on an evaluation dataset including narratives from VigiBase, the World Health Organization global database of adverse event reports for medicines and vaccines. Exact-match search and BM25 search with the Relevance Model (RM3), an alternative way to expand queries, were used as comparators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The gold standard included 55/750 narratives labelled as relevant. Our narrative search engine retrieved on average 56.4% of the relevant narratives (recall), which is higher when compared with exact-match search (21.8%), without a significant drop in precision  (54.5% to 43.1%). The recall is also higher as compared with RM3 (34.4%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study demonstrates that a narrative search engine supported by AI query suggestions can be a viable alternative to an exact-match search and BM25 search with RM3, since it can facilitate the retrieval of additional relevant narratives during signal assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":11382,"journal":{"name":"Drug Safety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Narrative Search Engine for Case Series Assessment Supported by Artificial Intelligence Query Suggestions.\",\"authors\":\"Alem Zekarias, Eva-Lisa Meldau, Shachi Bista, Joana Félix China, Lovisa Sandberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40264-025-01529-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Manual identification of case narratives with specific relevant information can be challenging when working with large numbers of adverse event reports (case series). The process can be supported with a search engine, but building search queries often remains a manual task. Suggesting terms to add to the search query could support assessors in the identification of case narratives within a case series.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study is to explore the feasibility of identifying case narratives containing specific characteristics with a narrative search engine supported by artificial intelligence (AI) query suggestions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The narrative search engine uses Best Match 25 (BM25) and suggests additional query terms from two word embedding models providing English and biomedical words to a human in the loop. We calculated the percentage of relevant narratives retrieved by the system (recall) and the percentage of retrieved narratives relevant to the search (precision) on an evaluation dataset including narratives from VigiBase, the World Health Organization global database of adverse event reports for medicines and vaccines. Exact-match search and BM25 search with the Relevance Model (RM3), an alternative way to expand queries, were used as comparators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The gold standard included 55/750 narratives labelled as relevant. Our narrative search engine retrieved on average 56.4% of the relevant narratives (recall), which is higher when compared with exact-match search (21.8%), without a significant drop in precision  (54.5% to 43.1%). The recall is also higher as compared with RM3 (34.4%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study demonstrates that a narrative search engine supported by AI query suggestions can be a viable alternative to an exact-match search and BM25 search with RM3, since it can facilitate the retrieval of additional relevant narratives during signal assessments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-025-01529-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-025-01529-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在处理大量不良事件报告(病例系列)时,使用特定相关信息手动识别病例叙述可能具有挑战性。搜索引擎可以支持该过程,但构建搜索查询通常仍然是一项手动任务。建议添加到搜索查询中的术语可以支持评估人员识别案例系列中的案例叙述。目的:本研究旨在探索人工智能(AI)查询建议支持的叙事搜索引擎识别包含特定特征的案例叙事的可行性。方法:叙事搜索引擎采用最佳匹配25 (BM25)算法,从两个词嵌入模型中向循环中的人提供英语词和生物医学词,并提出附加查询词。我们在评估数据集中计算了系统检索到的相关叙述的百分比(召回率)和检索到的与搜索相关的叙述的百分比(精确度),该评估数据集中包括来自世界卫生组织药物和疫苗不良事件报告全球数据库VigiBase的叙述。精确匹配搜索和使用关联模型(RM3)的BM25搜索(扩展查询的另一种方法)被用作比较器。结果:金标准包括55/750标记为相关的叙述。我们的叙述搜索引擎平均检索了56.4%的相关叙述(回忆),这比精确匹配搜索(21.8%)要高,但精度没有明显下降(54.5%到43.1%)。召回率也高于RM3(34.4%)。结论:我们的研究表明,由人工智能查询建议支持的叙事搜索引擎可以替代精确匹配搜索和RM3的BM25搜索,因为它可以促进在信号评估期间检索额外的相关叙事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Narrative Search Engine for Case Series Assessment Supported by Artificial Intelligence Query Suggestions.

Introduction: Manual identification of case narratives with specific relevant information can be challenging when working with large numbers of adverse event reports (case series). The process can be supported with a search engine, but building search queries often remains a manual task. Suggesting terms to add to the search query could support assessors in the identification of case narratives within a case series.

Objective: The aim of this study is to explore the feasibility of identifying case narratives containing specific characteristics with a narrative search engine supported by artificial intelligence (AI) query suggestions.

Methods: The narrative search engine uses Best Match 25 (BM25) and suggests additional query terms from two word embedding models providing English and biomedical words to a human in the loop. We calculated the percentage of relevant narratives retrieved by the system (recall) and the percentage of retrieved narratives relevant to the search (precision) on an evaluation dataset including narratives from VigiBase, the World Health Organization global database of adverse event reports for medicines and vaccines. Exact-match search and BM25 search with the Relevance Model (RM3), an alternative way to expand queries, were used as comparators.

Results: The gold standard included 55/750 narratives labelled as relevant. Our narrative search engine retrieved on average 56.4% of the relevant narratives (recall), which is higher when compared with exact-match search (21.8%), without a significant drop in precision  (54.5% to 43.1%). The recall is also higher as compared with RM3 (34.4%).

Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that a narrative search engine supported by AI query suggestions can be a viable alternative to an exact-match search and BM25 search with RM3, since it can facilitate the retrieval of additional relevant narratives during signal assessments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Drug Safety
Drug Safety 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
112
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Drug Safety is the official journal of the International Society of Pharmacovigilance. The journal includes: Overviews of contentious or emerging issues. Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on epidemiology, clinical features, prevention and management of adverse effects of individual drugs and drug classes. In-depth benefit-risk assessment of adverse effect and efficacy data for a drug in a defined therapeutic area. Systematic reviews (with or without meta-analyses) that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement. Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies in disciplines such as pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacovigilance, pharmacology and toxicology, and pharmacogenomics. Editorials and commentaries on topical issues. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Drug Safety Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
×
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