↓ Skip to main content

Modelling and extraction of variability in free-text medication prescriptions from an anonymised primary care electronic medical record research database

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Modelling and extraction of variability in free-text medication prescriptions from an anonymised primary care electronic medical record research database
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12911-016-0255-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

George Karystianis, Therese Sheppard, William G. Dixon, Goran Nenadic

Abstract

Free-text medication prescriptions contain detailed instruction information that is key when preparing drug data for analysis. The objective of this study was to develop a novel model and automated text-mining method to extract detailed structured medication information from free-text prescriptions and explore their variability (e.g. optional dosages) in primary care research databases. We introduce a prescription model that provides minimum and maximum values for dose number, frequency and interval, allowing modelling variability and flexibility within a drug prescription. We developed a text mining system that relies on rules to extract such structured information from prescription free-text dosage instructions. The system was applied to medication prescriptions from an anonymised primary care electronic record database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD). We have evaluated our approach on a test set of 220 CPRD prescription free-text directions. The system achieved an overall accuracy of 91 % at the prescription level, with 97 % accuracy across the attribute levels. We then further analysed over 56,000 most common free text prescriptions from CPRD records and found that 1 in 4 has inherent variability, i.e. a choice in taking medication specified by different minimum and maximum doses, duration or frequency. Our approach provides an accurate, automated way of coding prescription free text information, including information about flexibility and variability within a prescription. The method allows the researcher to decide how best to prepare the prescription data for drug efficacy and safety analyses in any given setting, and test various scenarios and their impact.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 100 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Researcher 20 20%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Librarian 5 5%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 20 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 27%
Computer Science 13 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 29 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,356,841
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,314
of 1,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,028
of 400,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#23
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,991 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 400,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.