ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2025
Analysis of eligibility criteria clusters based on large language models for clinical trial design.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence for clinical trial design, conduct, and analysis: a narrative review.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Review
- Implementing generative artificial intelligence in precision oncology: safety, governance, and significance.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2026Review
- Use of a Generative Pretrained Transformer to Answer Questions and Facilitate a Large Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Work smart, not hard: analysis of delays faced by clinical trials investigating spinal fusion using Protocol AI.Frontiers in surgery · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesClinical trials (CTs) are essential for improving patient care by evaluating new treatments' safety and efficacy. A key component in CT protocols is the study population defined by the eligibility criteria. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of large language models (LLMs) in encoding eligibility criterion information to support CT-protocol design. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe extracted eligibility criterion sections, phases, conditions, and interventions from CT protocols available in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry. Eligibility sections were split into individual rules using a criterion tokenizer and embedded using LLMs. The obtained representations were clustered. The quality and relevance of the clusters for protocol design was evaluated through 3 experiments: intrinsic alignment with protocol information and human expert cluster coherence assessment, extrinsic evaluation through CT-level classification tasks, and eligibility section generation.
resultsSentence embeddings fine-tuned using biomedical corpora produce clusters with the highest alignment to CT-level information. Human expert evaluation confirms that clusters are well structured and coherent. Despite the high information compression, clusters retain significant CT information, up to 97% of the classification performance obtained with raw embeddings. Finally, eligibility sections automatically generated using clusters achieve 95% of the ROUGE scores obtained with a generative LLM prompted with CT-protocol details, suggesting that clusters encapsulate information useful to CT-protocol design. DISCUSSION: Clusters derived from sentence-level LLM embeddings effectively summarize complex eligibility criterion data while retaining relevant CT-protocol details. Clustering-based approaches provide a scalable enhancement in CT design that balances information compression with accuracy.
conclusionsClustering eligibility criteria using LLM embeddings provides a practical and efficient method to summarize critical protocol information. We provide an interactive visualization of the pipeline here.
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.