Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39621674›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Needle in a haystack: Harnessing AI in drug patent searches and prediction.

Leonardo Costa Ribeiro, Valbona Muzaka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. The Market for Monoclonal Antibodies: Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Leonardo Costa RibeiroDepartamento de Ciências Econômicas, Faculdade de Ciências Econômicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brasil.
Valbona MuzakaEconomic-History Department, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3268-9506

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The classification codes granted by patent offices are useful instruments for simplifying the bewildering variety of patents in existence. They are singularly unhelpful, however, in locating a specific subgroup of patents such as that of drug-related pharmaceutical patents for which no classification codes exist. Taking advantage of advances in artificial intelligence and in natural language processing in particular, we offer a new method of identifying chemical drug-related patents in this article. The aim is primarily that of demonstrating how the proverbial needle in a haystack was identified, namely through leveraging the superb pattern-recognition abilities of the BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers) algorithm. We build three different databases to train our algorithm and fine-tune its abilities to identify the patent group in question by exposing it to additional texts containing structures that are much more likely to be present in them, until we obtain the highest possible F1-score, combined with an accuracy of 94.40%. We also demonstrate some possible uses of the algorithm. Its application to the US patent office database enables the identification of potential chemical drug patents up to ten years before drug approval, whereas its application to the German patent office reveals the regional nature of drug R&D and patenting strategies. The hope is that both the method proposed and its applications will be further refined and expanded forthwith.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligencePatents as TopicDatabases, FactualHumansNatural Language ProcessingPharmaceutical PreparationsPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID39621674
PMCPMC11611211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.