Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41726429›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2024

Recommending Clinical Trials for Online Patient Cases using Artificial Intelligence.

Joey Chan, Qiao Jin, Nicholas Wan, Charalampos S Floudas, Elisabetta Xue, Zhiyong Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2024. 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Joey ChanNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Qiao JinNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Nicholas WanNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Charalampos S FloudasNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Elisabetta XueNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Zhiyong LuNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical trials are crucial for assessing new treatments; however, recruitment challenges-such as limited awareness, complex eligibility criteria, and referral barriers-hinder their success. With the growth of online platforms, patients, caregivers, and family members increasingly post medical cases on social media and health communities, while physicians publish case reports accessible on platforms like PubMed-collectively expanding recruitment pools beyond traditional clinical trial pathways. Recognizing this potential, we utilized TrialGPT, a framework that leverages a large language model, to match 50 online patient cases (collected from case reports and social media) to clinical trials and evaluate performance against traditional keyword-based searches. Our results show that TrialGPT outperformed traditional methods by 46%, with patients eligible, on average, for 7 of the top 10 recommended trials. Additionally, outreach to case authors and trial organizers yielded positive feedback. These findings highlight TrialGPT's potential to expand patient access to specialized care through non-traditional sources.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCase Reports as TopicClinical Trials as TopicPatient SelectionGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansInternetLarge Language ModelsSocial Media

Identifiers

PMID41726429
PMCPMC12919571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.