Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27659604›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016

Automatic classification of registered clinical trials towards the Global Burden of Diseases taxonomy of diseases and injuries.

Ignacio Atal, Jean-David Zeitoun, Aurélie Névéol, Philippe Ravaud, Raphaël Porcher, Ludovic Trinquart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ignacio AtalCentre d'Épidémiologie Clinique, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Paris, France. ignacio.atal-ext@aphp.fr.
Jean-David ZeitounCentre d'Épidémiologie Clinique, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Paris, France.
Aurélie NévéolLIMSI, CNRS UPR 3251, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France.
Philippe RavaudCentre d'Épidémiologie Clinique, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Paris, France.
Raphaël PorcherCentre d'Épidémiologie Clinique, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Paris, France.
Ludovic TrinquartCentre d'Épidémiologie Clinique, Hôpital Hôtel-Dieu, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical trial registries may allow for producing a global mapping of health research. However, health conditions are not described with standardized taxonomies in registries. Previous work analyzed clinical trial registries to improve the retrieval of relevant clinical trials for patients. However, no previous work has classified clinical trials across diseases using a standardized taxonomy allowing a comparison between global health research and global burden across diseases. We developed a knowledge-based classifier of health conditions studied in registered clinical trials towards categories of diseases and injuries from the Global Burden of Diseases (GBD) 2010 study. The classifier relies on the UMLS® knowledge source (Unified Medical Language System®) and on heuristic algorithms for parsing data. It maps trial records to a 28-class grouping of the GBD categories by automatically extracting UMLS concepts from text fields and by projecting concepts between medical terminologies. The classifier allows deriving pathways between the clinical trial record and candidate GBD categories using natural language processing and links between knowledge sources, and selects the relevant GBD classification based on rules of prioritization across the pathways found. We compared automatic and manual classifications for an external test set of 2,763 trials. We automatically classified 109,603 interventional trials registered before February 2014 at WHO ICTRP.

resultsIn the external test set, the classifier identified the exact GBD categories for 78 % of the trials. It had very good performance for most of the 28 categories, especially "Neoplasms" (sensitivity 97.4 %, specificity 97.5 %). The sensitivity was moderate for trials not relevant to any GBD category (53 %) and low for trials of injuries (16 %). For the 109,603 trials registered at WHO ICTRP, the classifier did not assign any GBD category to 20.5 % of trials while the most common GBD categories were "Neoplasms" (22.8 %) and "Diabetes" (8.9 %).

conclusionsWe developed and validated a knowledge-based classifier allowing for automatically identifying the diseases studied in registered trials by using the taxonomy from the GBD 2010 study. This tool is freely available to the research community and can be used for large-scale public health studies.

Indexed as

Clinical trialsDisease classificationGlobal burden of diseasesMapping

Identifiers

PMID27659604
PMCPMC5034670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.