Cited by 76Machine Learning in HealthcareComputational Drug Discovery MethodsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Order-free Medicine Combination Prediction with Graph Convolutional Reinforcement Learning

Wang, Shanshan, Ren, Pengjie, Chen, Zhumin, Ren, Zhaochun, Ma, Jun, de Rijke, Maarten·2019·Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management

Abstract

Medicine Combination Prediction (MCP) based on Electronic Health Record (EHR) can assist doctors to prescribe medicines for complex patients. Previous studies on MCP either ignore the correlations between medicines (i.e., MCP is formulated as a binary classifcation task), or assume that there is a sequential correlation between medicines (i.e., MCP is formulated as a sequence prediction task). The latter is unreasonable because the correlations between medicines should be considered in an order-free way. Importantly, MCP must take additional medical knowledge (e.g., Drug-Drug Interaction (DDI)) into consideration to ensure the safety of medicine combinations. However, most previous methods for MCP incorporate DDI knowledge with a post-processing scheme, which might undermine the integrity of proposed medicine combinations. In this paper, we propose a graph convolutional reinforcement learning model for MCP, named Combined Order-free Medicine Prediction Network (CompNet), that addresses the issues listed above. CompNet casts the MCP task as an order-free Markov Decision Process (MDP) problem and designs a Deep Q Learning (DQL) mechanism to learn correlative and adverse interactions between medicines. Specifcally, we frst use a Dual Convolutional Neural Network (Dual-CNN) to obtain patient representations based on EHRs. Then, we introduce the medicine knowledge associated with predicted medicines to create a dynamic medicine knowledge graph, and use a Relational Graph Convolutional Network (R-GCN) to encode it. Finally, CompNet selects medicines by fusing the combination of patient information and the medicine knowledge graph. Experiments on a benchmark dataset, i.e., MIMIC-III, demonstrate that CompNet signifcantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods and improves a recently proposed model by 3.74%pt, 6.64%pt in terms of Jaccard and F1 metrics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3357384.3357965

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 46 · Cited by 76

Authors
Wang, S., Ren, P., Chen, Z., Ren, Z., Ma, J., & de Rijke, M.
Affiliations
  • Shandong University (CN)
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Venue
Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-11-03
Pages
1623-1632
ISSN
2155-0751 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2983825113
Cited by
76
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5
FWCI
3.06
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM) (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
drug-drug interactions, electronic health records, deep Q-learning, relational graph convolutional network, dual convolutional neural network, drug safety

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review