ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2023
Computational design of clinical trials using a combination of simulation and the genetic algorithm.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Governing AI for Pharmacovigilance in Low-Income Countries: Systems Perspective.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Computational design of clinical trials using a combination of simulation and the genetic algorithm.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has come to be used in various technological fields in recent years. However, there have been no reports of AI-designed clinical trials. In this study, we tried to develop study designs by a genetic algorithm (GA), which is an AI solution for combination optimization problems. Specifically, the computational design approach was applied to optimize the blood sampling schedule for a bioequivalence (BE) study in pediatrics and optimize the allocation of dose groups for a dose-finding study. The GA could reduce the number of blood collection points from 15 (typical standard) to seven points without meaningful impact on the accuracy and precision of the pharmacokinetic estimation for the pediatric BE study. For the dose-finding study, up to 10% reduction of the total number of required subjects from the standard design could be achieved. The GA also created a design that would lead to a drastic reduction of the required number of subjects in the placebo arm while keeping the total number of subjects at a minimum level. These results indicated the potential usefulness of the computational clinical study design approach for innovative drug development.
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.