ArticleCirculation. Heart failure2025
Natural Language Processing to Adjudicate Heart Failure Hospitalizations in Global Clinical Trials.
Article in Circulation. Heart failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in clinical trials-state of the evidence, gaps, and next steps.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular medicine: a practical guide for clinicians and researchers.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Review
- The Effect of Covariate Adjustment for Cox Regression in Cardiovascular Outcome Trials.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Plasma Metabolite Associations with Incident Heart Failure with Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence to Extract Structured Details From Unstructured Medical Records in a Global Heart Failure Trial.JACC. Heart failure · 2026Article
- Using Artificial Intelligence to Adjudicate Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Clinical Trials.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Enabled ECG Analysis to Predict Incident Heart Failure.Circulation. Heart failure · 2026Article
- The potential of artificial intelligence in clinical trials.European journal of clinical investigation · 2026Review
- Regional Electronic Health Records in Denmark: Research Potential for Clinical Epidemiology.Clinical epidemiology · 2026Review
- Multicriteria Optimization of Language Models for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Symptom Detection in Spanish Electronic Health Records: Comparative Modeling Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMedical record review by a physician clinical events committee is the gold standard for identifying cardiovascular outcomes in clinical trials, but is labor-intensive and poorly reproducible. Automated outcome adjudication by artificial intelligence (AI) could enable larger and less expensive clinical trials but has not been validated in global studies.
methodsWe developed a novel model for automated AI-based heart failure adjudication (Heart Failure Natural Language Processing) using hospitalizations from 3 international clinical outcomes trials. This model was tested on potential heart failure hospitalizations from the DELIVER trial (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure), a cardiovascular outcomes trial comparing dapagliflozin with placebo in 6063 patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. AI-based adjudications were compared with adjudications from a clinical events committee that followed Food and Drug Administration-based criteria.
resultsAI-based adjudication agreed with the clinical events committee in 83% of events. A strategy of human review for events that the AI model deemed uncertain (16%) would have achieved 91% agreement with the clinical events committee while reducing the adjudication workload by 84%. The estimated effect of dapagliflozin on heart failure hospitalization was nearly identical with AI-based adjudication (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.66-0.88]) compared with clinical events committee adjudication (hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67-0.89]). The AI model extracted symptoms, signs, and treatments of heart failure from each medical record in tabular format and quoted sentences documenting them.
conclusionsAI-based adjudication of clinical outcomes has the potential to improve the efficiency of global clinical trials while preserving accuracy and interpretability.
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.