Chinese-Named Entity Recognition From Adverse Drug Event Records: Radical Embedding-Combined Dynamic Embedding–Based BERT in a Bidirectional Long Short-term Conditional Random Field (Bi-LSTM-CRF) Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the increasing variety of drugs, the incidence of adverse drug events (ADEs) is increasing year by year. Massive numbers of ADEs are recorded in electronic medical records and adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports, which are important sources of potential ADR information. Meanwhile, it is essential to make latent ADR information automatically available for better postmarketing drug safety reevaluation and pharmacovigilance. OBJECTIVE: This study describes how to identify ADR-related information from Chinese ADE reports. METHODS: Our study established an efficient automated tool, named BBC-Radical. BBC-Radical is a model that consists of 3 components: Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), bidirectional long short-term memory (bi-LSTM), and conditional random field (CRF). The model identifies ADR-related information from Chinese ADR reports. Token features and radical features of Chinese characters were used to represent the common meaning of a group of words. BERT and Bi-LSTM-CRF were novel models that combined these features to conduct named entity recognition (NER) tasks in the free-text section of 24,890 ADR reports from the Jiangsu Province Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring Center from 2010 to 2016. Moreover, the man-machine comparison experiment on the ADE records from Drum Tower Hospital was designed to compare the NER performance between the BBC-Radical model and a manual method. RESULTS: The NER model achieved relatively high performance, with a precision of 96.4%, recall of 96.0%, and F1 score of 96.2%. This indicates that the performance of the BBC-Radical model (precision 87.2%, recall 85.7%, and F1 score 86.4%) is much better than that of the manual method (precision 86.1%, recall 73.8%, and F1 score 79.5%) in the recognition task of each kind of entity. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed model was competitive in extracting ADR-related information from ADE reports, and the results suggest that the application of our method to extract ADR-related information is of great significance in improving the quality of ADR reports and postmarketing drug safety evaluation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".