MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209941363 · doi:10.1093/bib/bbab449

A similarity-based deep learning approach for determining the frequencies of drug side effects

2021· article· en· W3209941363 on OpenAlexaff
Haochen Zhao, Shaokai Wang, Kai Zheng, Qichang Zhao, Feng Zhu, Jianxin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueBriefings in Bioinformatics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaScottish Funding Council
KeywordsSide effect (computer science)Computer scienceDrugSimilarity (geometry)Machine learningSide chainArtificial intelligenceFar side of the MoonData miningMedicinePharmacologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The side effects of drugs present growing concern attention in the healthcare system. Accurately identifying the side effects of drugs is very important for drug development and risk assessment. Some computational models have been developed to predict the potential side effects of drugs and provided satisfactory performance. However, most existing methods can only predict whether side effects will occur and cannot determine the frequency of side effects. Although a few existing methods can predict the frequency of drug side effects, they strongly depend on the known drug-side effect relationships. Therefore, they cannot be applied to new drugs without known side effect frequency information. In this paper, we develop a novel similarity-based deep learning method, named SDPred, for determining the frequencies of drug side effects. Compared with the existing state-of-the-art models, SDPred integrates rich features and can be applied to predict the side effect frequencies of new drugs without any known drug-side effect association or frequency information. To our knowledge, this is the first work that can predict the side effect frequencies of new drugs in the population. The comparison results indicate that SDPred is much superior to all previously reported models. In addition, some case studies also demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed method in practical applications. The SDPred software and data are freely available at https://github.com/zhc940702/SDPred, https://zenodo.org/record/5112573 and https://hub.docker.com/r/zhc940702/sdpred.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBriefings in BioinformaticsSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207