Predicting Intervention Approval in Clinical Trials through Multi-Document Summarization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2204.00290v1
• Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 08:45:39 GMT
• Title: Predicting Intervention Approval in Clinical Trials through Multi-Document Summarization
• Authors: Georgios Katsimpras, Georgios Paliouras
• Abstract summary: We propose a new method to predict the effectiveness of an intervention in a clinical trial. Our method relies on generating an informative summary from multiple documents available in the literature about the intervention under study.
• Score: 0.30458514384586405
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Clinical trials offer a fundamental opportunity to discover new treatments and advance the medical knowledge. However, the uncertainty of the outcome of a trial can lead to unforeseen costs and setbacks. In this study, we propose a new method to predict the effectiveness of an intervention in a clinical trial. Our method relies on generating an informative summary from multiple documents available in the literature about the intervention under study. Specifically, our method first gathers all the abstracts of PubMed articles related to the intervention. Then, an evidence sentence, which conveys information about the effectiveness of the intervention, is extracted automatically from each abstract. Based on the set of evidence sentences extracted from the abstracts, a short summary about the intervention is constructed. Finally, the produced summaries are used to train a BERT-based classifier, in order to infer the effectiveness of an intervention. To evaluate our proposed method, we introduce a new dataset which is a collection of clinical trials together with their associated PubMed articles. Our experiments, demonstrate the effectiveness of producing short informative summaries and using them to predict the effectiveness of an intervention.

Related papers

• The Blessings of Multiple Treatments and Outcomes in Treatment Effect Estimation [53.81860494566915]
  Existing studies leveraged proxy variables or multiple treatments to adjust for confounding bias. In many real-world scenarios, there is greater interest in studying the effects on multiple outcomes. We show that parallel studies of multiple outcomes involved in this setting can assist each other in causal identification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T14:33:48Z)
• Benchmarking Bayesian Causal Discovery Methods for Downstream Treatment Effect Estimation [137.3520153445413]
  A notable gap exists in the evaluation of causal discovery methods, where insufficient emphasis is placed on downstream inference. We evaluate seven established baseline causal discovery methods including a newly proposed method based on GFlowNets. The results of our study demonstrate that some of the algorithms studied are able to effectively capture a wide range of useful and diverse ATE modes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-11T02:58:10Z)
• Self-Verification Improves Few-Shot Clinical Information Extraction [73.6905567014859]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown the potential to accelerate clinical curation via few-shot in-context learning. They still struggle with issues regarding accuracy and interpretability, especially in mission-critical domains such as health. Here, we explore a general mitigation framework using self-verification, which leverages the LLM to provide provenance for its own extraction and check its own outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T22:05:11Z)
• Zero-shot causal learning [64.9368337542558]
  CaML is a causal meta-learning framework which formulates the personalized prediction of each intervention's effect as a task. We show that CaML is able to predict the personalized effects of novel interventions that do not exist at the time of training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-28T20:14:11Z)
• Distinguishing Transformative from Incremental Clinical Evidence: A Classifier of Clinical Research using Textual features from Abstracts and Citing Sentences [1.3135234328352885]
  In clinical research, it is important to know if a study changes or only supports the current standards of care for specific disease management. In this study, a machine learning approach is proposed to distinguishing transformative from incremental clinical evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-24T08:35:18Z)
• Sent2Span: Span Detection for PICO Extraction in the Biomedical Text without Span Annotations [17.480599429324155]
  Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) information from clinical trial articles may be an effective way to automatically assign trials to systematic reviews. We propose and test a novel approach to PICO span detection using only crowdsourced sentence-level annotations. Experiments on two datasets show that PICO span detection results achieve much higher results for recall when compared to fully supervised methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-06T06:14:49Z)
• Clinical Outcome Prediction from Admission Notes using Self-Supervised Knowledge Integration [55.88616573143478]
  Outcome prediction from clinical text can prevent doctors from overlooking possible risks. Diagnoses at discharge, procedures performed, in-hospital mortality and length-of-stay prediction are four common outcome prediction targets. We propose clinical outcome pre-training to integrate knowledge about patient outcomes from multiple public sources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-08T10:26:44Z)
• Understanding Clinical Trial Reports: Extracting Medical Entities and Their Relations [33.30381080306156]
  Medical experts must manually extract information from articles to inform decision-making. We consider the end-to-end task of both (a) extracting treatments and outcomes from full-text articles describing clinical trials (entity identification) and (b) inferring the reported results for the former with respect to the latter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-07T17:50:58Z)
• Generating (Factual?) Narrative Summaries of RCTs: Experiments with Neural Multi-Document Summarization [22.611879349101596]
  We evaluate modern neural models for abstractive summarization of relevant article abstracts from systematic reviews. We find that modern summarization systems yield consistently fluent and relevant synopses, but that they are not always factual.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-25T22:22:50Z)
• Medical Instrument Detection in Ultrasound-Guided Interventions: A Review [74.22397862400177]
  This article reviews medical instrument detection methods in the ultrasound-guided intervention. First, we present a comprehensive review of instrument detection methodologies, which include traditional non-data-driven methods and data-driven methods. We discuss the main clinical applications of medical instrument detection in ultrasound, including anesthesia, biopsy, prostate brachytherapy, and cardiac catheterization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-09T13:50:18Z)
• Trialstreamer: Mapping and Browsing Medical Evidence in Real-Time [35.15631358690484]
  We introduce Trialstreamer, a living database of clinical trial reports. The system extracts descriptions of trial participants, the treatments compared in each arm, and which outcomes were measured. In addition to summarizing individual trials, these extracted data elements allow automatic synthesis of results across many trials on the same topic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-21T19:32:04Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.