Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Korona-Bailey, Jessica

  • Google
  • 1
  • 4
  • 0

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2022Using Natural Language Processing to Predict Fatal Drug Overdose from Autopsy Narrative Textcitations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Walsh, Colin G.
1 / 1 shared
Mukhopadhyay, Sutapa
1 / 2 shared
Zaras, Dimitrios
1 / 1 shared
Roberts, Allison
1 / 1 shared
Chart of publication period
2022

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Walsh, Colin G.
  • Mukhopadhyay, Sutapa
  • Zaras, Dimitrios
  • Roberts, Allison
OrganizationsLocationPeople

document

Using Natural Language Processing to Predict Fatal Drug Overdose from Autopsy Narrative Text

  • Walsh, Colin G.
  • Korona-Bailey, Jessica
  • Mukhopadhyay, Sutapa
  • Zaras, Dimitrios
  • Roberts, Allison
Abstract

<sec><title>BACKGROUND</title><p>Fatal drug overdose surveillance informs prevention but is often delayed due to autopsy report processing and death certificate coding. Autopsy reports contain narrative text describing scene evidence and medical history (similar to preliminary death scene investigation reports) and may serve as early data sources for identifying fatal drug overdoses. To facilitate more timely fatal overdose reporting, natural language processing (NLP) was applied to narrative text from autopsies.</p></sec><sec><title>OBJECTIVE</title><p>This study aimed to develop an NLP-based model predicting the likelihood that an autopsy report narrative describes an accidental or undetermined fatal drug overdose.</p></sec><sec><title>METHODS</title><p>Autopsies for all manners of death (2019-2021) were obtained from the Tennessee Office of the State Chief Medical Examiner. Text was extracted from autopsy reports (in portable document format files) using optical character recognition. Three common narrative text sections were identified, concatenated, and preprocessed (bag-of-words) with term frequency-inverse document frequency scoring. Logistic regression, support vector machine (SVM), random forest, and gradient boosted trees classifiers were developed and validated. Autopsies from 2019-2020 were used for training (95%) and calibration (5%), and 2021 for testing. Model discrimination was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC), precision, recall, F1 score, and F2 score (prioritizes recall over precision). Calibration was performed using logistic regression (Platt scaling) and evaluated using the Spiegelhalter z-test. Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values were generated for models compatible with the method. In a post-hoc subgroup analysis of the random forest classifier, model discrimination was evaluated by forensic center, race, and age at death.</p></sec><sec><title>RESULTS</title><p>A total of 17,342 autopsies (34% cases, 66% controls) were used for model development and validation. The training set included 10,215 autopsies (33% cases, 67% controls), calibration set had 538 autopsies (34% cases, 66% controls), and test set had 6,589 autopsies (37% cases, 63% controls). The vocabulary set contained 4,002 terms. All models showed excellent performance (AUROC ≥0.95, precision ≥0.94, recall ≥0.92, F1 ≥0.94, and F2 ≥0.92). The SVM and random forest classifiers achieved the highest F2 scores (SVM F2=0.948; random forest F2=0.947). The logistic regression and random forest were calibrated (P=.95 and P=.85 respectively), while the SVM and gradient boosted trees classifiers were miscalibrated (P=.029 and P&lt;.001 respectively). “Fentanyl” and “accident” had the highest SHAP values. Post-hoc subgroup analyses revealed lower F2 scores for autopsy reports from forensic centers D and E. Lower F2 scores were also observed for the American Indian, Asian, ≤14, and ≥65 subgroups, but larger sample sizes are needed to validate these findings.</p></sec><sec><title>CONCLUSIONS</title><p>The random forest classifier may be suitable for identifying potential accidental and undetermined fatal overdose autopsies. Operationalizing this classifier could enable the early detection of accidental and undetermined fatal drug overdoses.</p></sec>

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • random
  • size-exclusion chromatography