ArticleBioData mining2025
Enhancing hepatopathy clinical trial efficiency: a secure, large language model-powered pre-screening pipeline.
Article in BioData mining, 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.
- From Invisible to Enrolled: How Artificial Intelligence Is Reshaping Clinical Trial Recruitment.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2026Article
- A comprehensive survey of AI agents in healthcare.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2026Review
- Evaluation Frameworks for Clinical Foundation Models in Specific Tasks of Unstructured Medical Text Analysis: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Large language models for clinical decision support in gastroenterology and hepatology.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecruitment for cohorts involving complex liver diseases, such as hepatocellular carcinoma and liver cirrhosis, often requires interpreting semantically complex criteria. Traditional manual screening methods are time-consuming and prone to errors. While AI-powered pre-screening offers potential solutions, challenges remain regarding accuracy, efficiency, and data privacy.
methodsWe developed a novel patient pre-screening pipeline that leverages clinical expertise to guide the precise, safe, and efficient application of large language models. The pipeline breaks down complex criteria into a series of composite questions and then employs two strategies to perform semantic question-answering through electronic health records: (1) Pathway A, Anthropomorphized Experts' Chain of Thought strategy; and (2) Pathway B, Preset Stances within an Agent Collaboration strategy, particularly in managing complex clinical reasoning scenarios. The pipeline is evaluated on key metrics including precision, recall, time consumption, and counterfactual inference-at both the question and criterion levels.
resultsOur pipeline achieved a notable balance of high precision (e.g., 0.921, criteria level) and good overall recall (e.g., ~ 0.82, criteria level), alongside high efficiency (0.44s per task). Pathway B excelled in high-precision complex reasoning (while exhibiting a specific recall profile conducive to accuracy), whereas Pathway A was particularly effective for tasks requiring both robust precision and recall (e.g., direct data extraction), often with faster processing times. Both pathways achieved comparable overall precision while offering different strengths in the precision-recall trade-off. The pipeline showed promising precision-focused results in hepatocellular carcinoma (0.878) and cirrhosis trials (0.843).
conclusionsThis data-secure and time-efficient pipeline shows high precision and achieves good recall in hepatopathy trials, providing promising solutions for streamlining clinical trial workflows. Its efficiency, adaptability, and balanced performance profile make it suitable for improving patient recruitment. And its capability to function in resource-constrained environments further enhances its utility in clinical settings.
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.