Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40428107›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025

TrialSieve: A Comprehensive Biomedical Information Extraction Framework for PICO, Meta-Analysis, and Drug Repurposing.

David Kartchner, Haydn Turner, Christophe Ye, Irfan Al-Hussaini, Batuhan Nursal, Albert J B Lee, Jennifer Deng, Courtney Curtis, Hannah Cho, Eva L Duvaris and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

15 authors.

David KartchnerLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1937-1840
Haydn TurnerLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Christophe YeLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Irfan Al-HussainiLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2969-7019
Batuhan NursalLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Albert J B LeeLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Jennifer DengLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Courtney CurtisLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-9496-1661
Hannah ChoLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Eva L DuvarisLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Coral JacksonLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Catherine E ShanksLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Sarah Y TanLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.
Selvi RamalingamLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4142-7337
Cassie S MitchellLaboratory for Pathology Dynamics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5472-6355

Funding

Regulatory and Human Study Operations (RHSO) Core CU19AG065169 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI HUENTELMAN, MATT · 2021 to 2025
$59.8M
The Emory Healthy Brain Study: Discovering Predictive Biomarkers for Alzheimer's DiseaseR01AG070937 · NIA · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI LAH, JAMES J · 2021 to 2025
$35.2M
The Goizueta Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP30AG066511 · NIA · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Amy D Rodriguez · 2020 to 2026
$29.0M
Integrative predictive medicine to identify disease causes, develop cures, and optimize patient careR35GM152245 · NIGMS · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI Cassie S Mitchell · 2024 to 2026
$1.1M
Chan Zuckerberg Initiative 253558Morningside Center for Innovative and Affordable Medicine at Emory NANational Science Foundation 1944247NIA NIH HHS P30 AG066511NIA NIH HHS R01 AG070937NIA NIH HHS U19 AG065169NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM152245NIH HHS R35GM152245NIH HHS U19AG056169
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This work introduces TrialSieve, a novel framework for biomedical information extraction that enhances clinical meta-analysis and drug repurposing. By extending traditional PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) methodologies, TrialSieve incorporates hierarchical, treatment group-based graphs, enabling more comprehensive and quantitative comparisons of clinical outcomes. TrialSieve was used to annotate 1609 PubMed abstracts, 170,557 annotations, and 52,638 final spans, incorporating 20 unique annotation categories that capture a diverse range of biomedical entities relevant to systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The performance (accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score) of four natural-language processing (NLP) models (BioLinkBERT, BioBERT, KRISSBERT, PubMedBERT) and the large language model (LLM), GPT-4o, was evaluated using the human-annotated TrialSieve dataset. BioLinkBERT had the best accuracy (0.875) and recall (0.679) for biomedical entity labeling, whereas PubMedBERT had the best precision (0.614) and F1-score (0.639). Error analysis showed that NLP models trained on noisy, human-annotated data can match or, in most cases, surpass human performance. This finding highlights the feasibility of fully automating biomedical information extraction, even when relying on imperfectly annotated datasets. An annotator user study (n = 39) revealed significant (

Indexed as

artificial intelligencebiocurationbiomedical information extractionbiomedical literature annotationbiomedical literature schemalarge language modelnamed entity recognitionnatural-language processingtext mining

Identifiers

PMID40428107
PMCPMC12109152

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.