SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2020
Artificial Intelligence for Rapid Meta-Analysis: Case Study on Ocular Toxicity of Hydroxychloroquine.
Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) in ASD treatment.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Use of Machine Learning Tools in Evidence Synthesis of Tobacco Use Among Sexual and Gender Diverse Populations: Algorithm Development and Validation.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Comparing Meta-Analyses with ChatGPT in the Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Tolerance of Systemic Therapies in Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The potential and pitfalls of artificial intelligence in clinical pharmacology.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence in COVID-19 evidence syntheses was underutilized, but impactful: a methodological study.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- The diagnostic accuracy of Artificial Intelligence-Assisted CT imaging in COVID-19 disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Informatics in medicine unlocked · 2021Review
- Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the Future of Clinical Pharmacy and Hospital Settings.Journal of research in pharmacy practiceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRapid access to evidence is crucial in times of an evolving clinical crisis. To that end, we propose a novel approach to answer clinical queries, termed rapid meta-analysis (RMA). Unlike traditional meta-analysis, RMA balances a quick time to production with reasonable data quality assurances, leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) to strike this balance.
objectiveWe aimed to evaluate whether RMA can generate meaningful clinical insights, but crucially, in a much faster processing time than traditional meta-analysis, using a relevant, real-world example.
methodsThe development of our RMA approach was motivated by a currently relevant clinical question: is ocular toxicity and vision compromise a side effect of hydroxychloroquine therapy? At the time of designing this study, hydroxychloroquine was a leading candidate in the treatment of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We then leveraged AI to pull and screen articles, automatically extract their results, review the studies, and analyze the data with standard statistical methods.
resultsBy combining AI with human analysis in our RMA, we generated a meaningful, clinical result in less than 30 minutes. The RMA identified 11 studies considering ocular toxicity as a side effect of hydroxychloroquine and estimated the incidence to be 3.4% (95% CI 1.11%-9.96%). The heterogeneity across individual study findings was high, which should be taken into account in interpretation of the result.
conclusionsWe demonstrate that a novel approach to meta-analysis using AI can generate meaningful clinical insights in a much shorter time period than traditional meta-analysis.
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.