ArticleJMIR medical informatics2019
Cohort Selection for Clinical Trials From Longitudinal Patient Records: Text Mining Approach.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review on natural language processing systems for eligibility prescreening in clinical research.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence in clinical trial participant recruitment and retention: A scoping review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Review
- Natural Language Processing in Support of Evidence-based Medicine: A Scoping Review.Findings of ACL. ACL · 2025Article
- Matching Patients to Clinical Trials using LLaMA 2 Embeddings and Siamese Neural Network.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Word sense disambiguation of acronyms in clinical narratives.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- Validation and Improvement of a Convolutional Neural Network to Predict the Involved Pathology in a Head and Neck Surgery Cohort.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Cohort Identification from Free-Text Clinical Notes Using SNOMED CT's Hierarchical Semantic Relations.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2022Article
- Text Mining of Adverse Events in Clinical Trials: Deep Learning Approach.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Applications of artificial intelligence in drug development using real-world data.Drug discovery today · 2021Review
- Patient Triage by Topic Modeling of Referral Letters: Feasibility Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Predictive Modeling for Frailty Conditions in Elderly People: Machine Learning Approaches.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical trials are an important step in introducing new interventions into clinical practice by generating data on their safety and efficacy. Clinical trials need to ensure that participants are similar so that the findings can be attributed to the interventions studied and not to some other factors. Therefore, each clinical trial defines eligibility criteria, which describe characteristics that must be shared by the participants. Unfortunately, the complexities of eligibility criteria may not allow them to be translated directly into readily executable database queries. Instead, they may require careful analysis of the narrative sections of medical records. Manual screening of medical records is time consuming, thus negatively affecting the timeliness of the recruitment process.
objectiveTrack 1 of the 2018 National Natural Language Processing Clinical Challenge focused on the task of cohort selection for clinical trials, aiming to answer the following question: Can natural language processing be applied to narrative medical records to identify patients who meet eligibility criteria for clinical trials? The task required the participating systems to analyze longitudinal patient records to determine if the corresponding patients met the given eligibility criteria. We aimed to describe a system developed to address this task.
methodsOur system consisted of 13 classifiers, one for each eligibility criterion. All classifiers used a bag-of-words document representation model. To prevent the loss of relevant contextual information associated with such representation, a pattern-matching approach was used to extract context-sensitive features. They were embedded back into the text as lexically distinguishable tokens, which were consequently featured in the bag-of-words representation. Supervised machine learning was chosen wherever a sufficient number of both positive and negative instances was available to learn from. A rule-based approach focusing on a small set of relevant features was chosen for the remaining criteria.
resultsThe system was evaluated using microaveraged F measure. Overall, 4 machine algorithms, including support vector machine, logistic regression, naïve Bayesian classifier, and gradient tree boosting (GTB), were evaluated on the training data using 10-fold cross-validation. Overall, GTB demonstrated the most consistent performance. Its performance peaked when oversampling was used to balance the training data. The final evaluation was performed on previously unseen test data. On average, the F measure of 89.04% was comparable to 3 of the top ranked performances in the shared task (91.11%, 90.28%, and 90.21%). With an F measure of 88.14%, we significantly outperformed these systems (81.03%, 78.50%, and 70.81%) in identifying patients with advanced coronary artery disease.
conclusionsThe holdout evaluation provides evidence that our system was able to identify eligible patients for the given clinical trial with high accuracy. Our approach demonstrates how rule-based knowledge infusion can improve the performance of machine learning algorithms even when trained on a relatively small dataset.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.