ArticleJMIR AI2024
Optimizing Clinical Trial Eligibility Design Using Natural Language Processing Models and Real-World Data: Algorithm Development and Validation.
Article in JMIR AI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Improving Participant Recruitment in Clinical Trials: Comparative Analysis of Innovative Digital Platforms.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- AI-Enabled Real-World Evidence in Oncology: A Statistical Perspective for Regulatory Decisions.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Review
- The complementary roles of oversight, education, and collaboration in the responsible integration of artificial intelligence in radiation medicine: White paper of CADRA.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Review
- Perceptions of challenges in clinical pediatric research: a survey of Italian pediatricians.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Natural Language Processing in Support of Evidence-based Medicine: A Scoping Review.Findings of ACL. ACL · 2025Article
- CriteriaMapper: establishing the automatic identification of clinical trial cohorts from electronic health records by matching normalized eligibility criteria and patient clinical characteristics.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical trials are vital for developing new therapies but can also delay drug development. Efficient trial data management, optimized trial protocol, and accurate patient identification are critical for reducing trial timelines. Natural language processing (NLP) has the potential to achieve these objectives.
objectiveThis study aims to assess the feasibility of using data-driven approaches to optimize clinical trial protocol design and identify eligible patients. This involves creating a comprehensive eligibility criteria knowledge base integrated within electronic health records using deep learning-based NLP techniques.
methodsWe obtained data of 3281 industry-sponsored phase 2 or 3 interventional clinical trials recruiting patients with non-small cell lung cancer, prostate cancer, breast cancer, multiple myeloma, ulcerative colitis, and Crohn disease from ClinicalTrials.gov, spanning the period between 2013 and 2020. A customized bidirectional long short-term memory- and conditional random field-based NLP pipeline was used to extract all eligibility criteria attributes and convert hypernym concepts into computable hyponyms along with their corresponding values. To illustrate the simulation of clinical trial design for optimization purposes, we selected a subset of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (n=2775), curated from the Mount Sinai Health System, as a pilot study.
resultsWe manually annotated the clinical trial eligibility corpus (485/3281, 14.78% trials) and constructed an eligibility criteria-specific ontology. Our customized NLP pipeline, developed based on the eligibility criteria-specific ontology that we created through manual annotation, achieved high precision (0.91, range 0.67-1.00) and recall (0.79, range 0.50-1) scores, as well as a high F
conclusionsOur customized NLP pipeline successfully generated a standardized eligibility criteria knowledge base by transforming hypernym criteria into machine-readable hyponyms along with their corresponding values. A prototype interface integrating real-world patient information allows us to assess the impact of each eligibility criterion on the number of patients eligible for the trial. Leveraging NLP and real-world data in a data-driven approach holds promise for streamlining the overall clinical trial process, optimizing processes, and improving efficiency in patient identification.
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.