The automation of relevant trial registration screening for systematic review updates: an evaluation study on a large dataset of ClinicalTrials.gov registrations.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Clinical trial registries can be used as sources of clinical evidence for systematic review synthesis and updating. Our aim was to evaluate methods for identifying clinical trial registrations that should be screened for inclusion in updates of published systematic reviews.Methods
A set of 4644 clinical trial registrations (ClinicalTrials.gov) included in 1089 systematic reviews (PubMed) were used to evaluate two methods (document similarity and hierarchical clustering) and representations (L2-normalised TF-IDF, Latent Dirichlet Allocation, and Doc2Vec) for ranking 163,501 completed clinical trials by relevance. Clinical trial registrations were ranked for each systematic review using seeding clinical trials, simulating how new relevant clinical trials could be automatically identified for an update. Performance was measured by the number of clinical trials that need to be screened to identify all relevant clinical trials.Results
Using the document similarity method with TF-IDF feature representation and Euclidean distance metric, all relevant clinical trials for half of the systematic reviews were identified after screening 99 trials (IQR 19 to 491). The best-performing hierarchical clustering was using Ward agglomerative clustering (with TF-IDF representation and Euclidean distance) and needed to screen 501 clinical trials (IQR 43 to 4363) to achieve the same result.Conclusion
An evaluation using a large set of mined links between published systematic reviews and clinical trial registrations showed that document similarity outperformed hierarchical clustering for identifying relevant clinical trials to include in systematic review updates.
SUBMITTER: Surian D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8684229 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:In a randomized crossover trial, each participant is randomized to a sequence of treatments and treatment effect is estimated based on within-individual difference because each participant serves as his/her own control. This feature makes the design and reporting of randomized crossover trials different from that of parallel trials. Our objective was to characterize phase 3 crossover trials with results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov and identify issues and best practices for reporting. METHODS:We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for phase 3 randomized crossover trials that provided results, registered at least one primary outcome, and included at least one link to a results publication in the record by August 6, 2019. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and extracted information from each record into an electronic form developed and maintained in the Systematic Review Data Repository. RESULTS:Of the 124 crossover trials analyzed, two thirds were a simple "Intervention A then B" or "Intervention B then A" (AB|BA) design. Most trials (78%, 97/124) provided enough information to understand the participant flow throughout the trial. Baseline characteristics were most often reported for all participants as a single group (52%, 65/124). Primary outcomes and adverse events were most commonly reported "per intervention" (85%, 105/124, and 80%, 99/124, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:The registration and reporting of randomized crossover trials must account for the paired nature of the design. Our observations and recommendations informed the development of guidelines for good reporting practices in the registration and reporting of randomized crossover trials.
| S-EPMC7336618 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinicalTrials.gov is a publicly accessible, Internet-based registry of clinical trials managed by the US National Library of Medicine that has the potential to address selective trial publication. Our objectives were to examine completeness of registration within ClinicalTrials.gov and to determine the extent and correlates of selective publication.Methods and findingsWe examined reporting of registration information among a cross-section of trials that had been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov after December 31, 1999 and updated as having been completed by June 8, 2007, excluding phase I trials. We then determined publication status among a random 10% subsample by searching MEDLINE using a systematic protocol, after excluding trials completed after December 31, 2005 to allow at least 2 y for publication following completion. Among the full sample of completed trials (n = 7,515), nearly 100% reported all data elements mandated by ClinicalTrials.gov, such as intervention and sponsorship. Optional data element reporting varied, with 53% reporting trial end date, 66% reporting primary outcome, and 87% reporting trial start date. Among the 10% subsample, less than half (311 of 677, 46%) of trials were published, among which 96 (31%) provided a citation within ClinicalTrials.gov of a publication describing trial results. Trials primarily sponsored by industry (40%, 144 of 357) were less likely to be published when compared with nonindustry/nongovernment sponsored trials (56%, 110 of 198; p<0.001), but there was no significant difference when compared with government sponsored trials (47%, 57 of 122; p = 0.22). Among trials that reported an end date, 75 of 123 (61%) completed prior to 2004, 50 of 96 (52%) completed during 2004, and 62 of 149 (42%) completed during 2005 were published (p = 0.006).ConclusionsReporting of optional data elements varied and publication rates among completed trials registered within ClinicalTrials.gov were low. Without greater attention to reporting of all data elements, the potential for ClinicalTrials.gov to address selective publication of clinical trials will be limited. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
| S-EPMC2728480 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A method for Red Blood Corpuscles (RBCs) counting has been developed using RBCs light microscopic images and Matlab algorithm. The Dataset consists of Red Blood Corpuscles (RBCs) images and there RBCs segmented images. A detailed description using flow chart is given in order to show how to produce RBCs mask. The RBCs mask was used to count the number of RBCs in the blood smear image.
| S-EPMC4556816 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: Clinical trials are the most effective method for evaluating therapeutic strategies. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively assess the characteristics of trials on lupus nephritis (LN) and provide a reference for LN treatment and research. Methods: Registered therapeutic trials on drug interventions for LN were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 3, 2020. The general characteristics, methodological characteristics, detailed characteristics, investigated drugs, eligibility criteria, and outcome measures of these trials were analyzed. Results: A total of 126 eligible trials were evaluated, and these trials mainly investigated the initial treatment of adult proliferative LN. Half of the trials enrolled <50 participants, and 70.7% of the trials lasted for 6-24 months. In total, 95.2% of trials adopted an interventional study design. Of intervention trials, 56.6% were in phase 2 or phase 3, 76.7% were randomized, 77.5% employed a parallel assignment, and 41.7% were masked. The eligibility criteria and outcome measures of the included trials varied and involved a variety of indicators. Chemical agents and biologics are the most widely studied immunotherapies, of which mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, and rituximab are the most studied. In addition, some trials studied cell transplantation treatment. Conclusions: The majority of clinical trials for LN therapy registered on ClinicalTrials.gov investigated the initial treatment of adult proliferative LN, and most of these trials were randomized, parallel assigned, and insufficiently masked interventional trials with small scale, short duration, various eligibility criteria, and outcome measures. We hope that more large-scale, long-term multicenter, and high-quality RCT trials with standardized inclusion criteria/exclusion criteria and treatment effect evaluation systems will be conducted and that more energy and funding will be put into exploring biological products and stem cell therapies. In addition, trials for membranous LN, childhood-onset LN, and maintenance phase LN are needed to establish optimal treatment strategies.
| S-EPMC8248800 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The goal of this work is to evaluate the effectiveness of Plan-Checker Tool (PCT) which was created to improve first-time plan quality, reduce patient delays, increase the efficiency of our electronic workflow, and standardize and automate the phys-ics plan review in the treatment planning system (TPS). PCT uses an application programming interface to check and compare data from the TPS and treatment management system (TMS). PCT includes a comprehensive checklist of automated and manual checks that are documented when performed by the user as part of a plan readiness check for treatment. Prior to and during PCT development, errors identified during the physics review and causes of patient treatment start delays were tracked to prioritize which checks should be automated. Nineteen of 33checklist items were automated, with data extracted with PCT. There was a 60% reduction in the number of patient delays in the six months after PCT release. PCT was suc-cessfully implemented for use on all external beam treatment plans in our clinic. While the number of errors found during the physics check did not decrease, automation of checks increased visibility of errors during the physics check, which led to decreased patient delays. The methods used here can be applied to any TMS and TPS that allows queries of the database.
| S-EPMC5378447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose of reviewTo review state of art and relevant advances in the molecular genetics and management of ependymomas of children and adults.Recent findingsEpendymomas may occur either in the brain or in the spinal cord. Compared with intracranial ependymomas, spinal ependymomas are less frequent and exhibit a better prognosis. The new WHO classification of CNS tumors of 2021 has subdivided ependymomas into different histomolecular subgroups with different outcome. The majority of studies have shown a major impact of extent of resection; thus, a complete resection must be performed, whenever possible, at first surgery or at reoperation. Conformal radiotherapy is recommended for grade 3 or incompletely resected grade II tumors. Proton therapy is increasingly employed especially in children to reduce the risk of neurocognitive and endocrine sequelae. Craniospinal irradiation is reserved for metastatic disease. Chemotherapy is not useful as primary treatment and is commonly employed as salvage treatment for patients failing surgery and radiotherapy. Standard treatments are still the mainstay of treatment: the discovery of new druggable pathways will hopefully increase the therapeutic armamentarium in the near future.
| S-EPMC9249684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The data provided in the present article provides information on the importance of a list of monetary and non-monetary influencing factors on decisions regarding the automation of an assembly system. A survey among German industry representatives conducted between July 2018 and October 2018 is the basis for this dataset. It contains the characteristics of industrial companies based in Germany that participated in the survey as well as their attitude towards the development of the automation level in assembly systems. The focus of the survey lies on the influencing factors of the production and production environment and their influence on the automation level. The participants were able to evaluate the factors on a six-step ordinal scale from "no influence" to "very strong influence". Interpretation of this data can be found in the research article titled "Automation decisions in flow-line assembly systems based on a cost-benefit analysis" [1].
| S-EPMC7284056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Case Surveillance and Vital Registration (CSAVR) model within Spectrum estimates HIV incidence trends from surveillance data on numbers of new HIV diagnoses and HIV-related deaths. This article describes developments of the CSAVR tool to more flexibly model diagnosis rates over time, estimate incidence patterns by sex and age group and by key population group.MethodsWe modelled HIV diagnosis rate trends as a mixture of three factors, including temporal and opportunistic infection components. The tool was expanded to estimate incidence rate ratios by sex and age for countries with disaggregated reporting of new HIV diagnoses and AIDS deaths, and to account for information on key populations such as men who have sex with men (MSM), males who inject drugs (MWID), female sex workers (FSW) and females who inject drugs (FWID). We used a Bayesian framework to calibrate the tool in 71 high-income or low-HIV burden countries.ResultsAcross countries, an estimated median 89% (interquartile range [IQR]: 78%-96%) of HIV-positive adults knew their status in 2019. Mean CD4 counts at diagnosis were stable over time, with a median of 456 cells/μl (IQR: 391-508) across countries in 2019. In European countries reporting new HIV diagnoses among key populations, median estimated proportions of males that are MSM and MWID was 1.3% (IQR: 0.9%-2.0%) and 0.56% (IQR: 0.51%-0.64%), respectively. The median estimated proportions of females that are FSW and FWID were 0.36% (IQR: 0.27%-0.45%) and 0.14 (IQR: 0.13%-0.15%), respectively. HIV incidence per 100 person-years increased among MSM, with median estimates reaching 0.43 (IQR: 0.29-1.73) in 2019, but remained stable in MWID, FSW and FWID, at around 0.12 (IQR: 0.04-1.9), 0.09 (IQR: 0.06-0.69) and 0.13% (IQR: 0.08%-0.91%) in 2019, respectively. Knowledge of HIV status among HIV-positive adults gradually increased since the early 1990s to exceed 75% in more than 75% of countries in 2019 among each key population.ConclusionsCSAVR offers an approach to using routine surveillance and vital registration data to estimate and project trends in both HIV incidence and knowledge of HIV status.
| S-EPMC8454676 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSystematic reviews are important in health care but are expensive to produce and maintain. The authors explore the use of automated transformations of Boolean queries to improve the identification of relevant studies for updates to systematic reviews.Materials and methodsA set of query transformations, including operator substitution, query expansion, and query reduction, were used to iteratively modify the Boolean query used for the original systematic review. The most effective transformation at each stage is identified using information about the studies included and excluded from the original review. A dataset consisting of 22 systematic reviews was used for evaluation. Updated queries were evaluated using the included and excluded studies from the updated version of the review. Recall and precision were used as evaluation measures.ResultsThe updated queries were more effective than the ones used for the original review, in terms of both precision and recall. The overall number of documents retrieved was reduced by more than half, while the number of relevant documents found increased by 10.3%.ConclusionsIdentification of relevant studies for updates to systematic reviews can be carried out more effectively by using information about the included and excluded studies from the original review to produce improved Boolean queries. These updated queries reduce the overall number of documents retrieved while also increasing the number of relevant documents identified, thereby representing a considerable reduction in effort required by systematic reviewers.
| S-EPMC7750994 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUS Federal regulations since the late 1990s have required registration of some clinical trials and submission of results for some of these trials on a public registry, ClinicalTrials.gov. The quality of the submissions made to ClinicalTrials.gov determines the duration of the Quality Control review, whether the submission will pass the review (success), and how many review cycles it will take for a study to be posted. Success rate for all results submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov is less than 25%. To increase the success of investigators' submissions and meet the requirements of registration and submission of results in a timely fashion, the Johns Hopkins ClinicalTrials.gov Program implemented a policy to review all studies for quality before submission. To standardize our review for quality, minimize inter-reviewer variability, and have a tool for training new staff, we developed a checklist.MethodsThe Program staff learned from major comments received from ClinicalTrials.gov and also reviewed the Protocol Registration and Results System review criteria for registration and results to fully understand how to prepare studies to pass Quality Control review. These were summarized into bulleted points and incorporated into a checklist used by Program staff to review studies before submission.ResultsIn the period before the introduction of the checklist, 107 studies were submitted for registration with a 45% (48/107) success rate, a mean (SD) of 18.9 (26.72) days in review, and 1.74 (0.78) submission cycles. Results for 44 records were submitted with 11% (5/44) success rate, 115.80 (129.33) days in review, and 2.23 (0.68) submission cycles. In the period after the checklist, 104 studies were submitted for registration with 80% (83/104) success rate, 2.12 (3.85) days in review, and 1.22 (0.46) submission cycles. Results for 22 records were submitted with 41% (9/22) success rate, 39.27 (19.84) days in review, and 1.64 (0.58) submission cycles. Of the 44 results submitted prior to the checklist, 30 were Applicable or Probable Applicable Clinical Trials, with 10% (3/30) being posted within 30 days as required of the National Institutes of Health. For the 22 results submitted after the checklist, 17 were Applicable or Probable Applicable Clinical Trials, with 47% (8/17) being posted within 30 days of submission. These pre- and post-checklist differences were statistically significant improvements.ConclusionThe checklist has substantially improved our success rate and contributed to a reduction in the review days and number of review cycles. If Academic Medical Centers and industry will adopt or create a similar checklist to review their studies before submission, the quality of the submissions can be improved and the duration of review can be minimized.
| S-EPMC7655525 | biostudies-literature