Rx-refill Graph Neural Network to Reduce Drug Overprescribing Risks (Extended Abstract)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prescription (aka Rx) drugs can be easily overprescribed and lead to drug abuse or opioid overdose. Accordingly, a state-run prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) in the United States has been developed to reduce overprescribing. However, PDMP has limited capability in detecting patients' potential overprescribing behaviors, impairing its effectiveness in preventing drug abuse and overdose in patients. In this paper, we propose a novel model RxNet, which builds 1) a dynamic heterogeneous graph to model Rx refills that are essentially prescribing and dispensing (P&D) relationships among various patients, 2) an RxLSTM network to explore the dynamic Rx-refill behavior and medical condition variation of patients, and 3) a dosing-adaptive network to extract and recalibrate dosing patterns and obtain the refined patient representations which are finally utilized for overprescribing detection. The extensive experimental results on a one-year state-wide PDMP data demonstrate that RxNet consistently outperforms state-of-the-art methods in predicting patients at high risk of opioid overdose and drug abuse.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".