ArticleCureus2024
Utilizing Large Language Models for Enhanced Clinical Trial Matching: A Study on Automation in Patient Screening.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging electronic health records for atrial fibrillation cohort generation.Health information science and systems · 2026Article
- Automating the Management of Extraspinal Findings in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Spine Studies Using a Privacy-Preserving Large Language Model: Retrospective Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Generative AI, foundation models and large language models in radiation therapy physics: Clinical applications, challenges, and future directions.Medical physics · 2026Review
- Large Language Models in Clinical Trial Recruitment: Sociotechnical and Economic Framework Development Study.JMIR AI · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in clinical trial participant recruitment and retention: A scoping review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Review
- AI-augmented frameworks for enhancing Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: A memory clinic perspective.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2025Article
- Exploring the potential of AI-powered applications for clinical decision-making in gynecologic oncology.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Article
- Use of a Generative Pretrained Transformer to Answer Questions and Facilitate a Large Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Large Language Models to Identify Stroke Subtypes Within Unstructured Electronic Health Record Data.Stroke · 2025Article
- Natural Language Processing in Support of Evidence-based Medicine: A Scoping Review.Findings of ACL. ACL · 2025Article
- Enhancing Patient-Trial Matching With Large Language Models: A Scoping Review of Emerging Applications and Approaches.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
- Perspectives and Experiences With Large Language Models in Health Care: Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Identifying Deprescribing Opportunities With Large Language Models in Older Adults: Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR aging · 2025Article
- Extracting Pulmonary Embolism Diagnoses From Radiology Impressions Using GPT-4o: Large Language Model Evaluation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- AI meets informed consent: a new era for clinical trial communication.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- Exploration of Using an Open-Source Large Language Model for Analyzing Trial Information: A Case Study of Clinical Trials With Decentralized Elements.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Large Language Models Diagnose Facial Deformity.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Natural Language Processing in medicine and ophthalmology: A review for the 21st-century clinician.Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Clinical trial matching, essential for advancing medical research, involves detailed screening of potential participants to ensure alignment with specific trial requirements. Research staff face challenges due to the high volume of eligible patients and the complexity of varying eligibility criteria. The traditional manual process, both time-consuming and error-prone, often leads to missed opportunities. Recently, large language models (LLMs), specifically generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs), have become impressive and impactful tools. Utilizing such tools from artificial intelligence (AI) and natural language processing (NLP) may enhance the accuracy and efficiency of this process through automated patient screening against established criteria. Methods Utilizing data from the National NLP Clinical Challenges (n2c2) 2018 Challenge, we utilized 202 longitudinal patient records. These records were annotated by medical professionals and evaluated against 13 selection criteria encompassing various health assessments. Our approach involved embedding medical documents into a vector database to determine relevant document sections and then using an LLM (OpenAI's GPT-3.5 Turbo and GPT-4) in tandem with structured and chain-of-thought prompting techniques for systematic document assessment against the criteria. Misclassified criteria were also examined to identify classification challenges. Results This study achieved an accuracy of 0.81, sensitivity of 0.80, specificity of 0.82, and a micro F1 score of 0.79 using GPT-3.5 Turbo, and an accuracy of 0.87, sensitivity of 0.85, specificity of 0.89, and micro F1 score of 0.86 using GPT-4. Notably, some criteria in the ground truth appeared mislabeled, an issue we couldn't explore further due to insufficient label generation guidelines on the website. Conclusion Our findings underscore the potential of AI and NLP technologies, including LLMs, in the clinical trial matching process. The study demonstrated strong capabilities in identifying eligible patients and minimizing false inclusions. Such automated systems promise to alleviate the workload of research staff and improve clinical trial enrollment, thus accelerating the process and enhancing the overall feasibility of clinical research. Further work is needed to determine the potential of this approach when implemented on real clinical data.
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.