论文标题
一种自动化的方法来提取正面和负面的临床研究结果
An automated approach to extracting positive and negative clinical research results
论文作者
论文摘要
失败在临床试验中很常见,因为负面结果中的成功失败始终表明不应采取的方式。在本文中,我们提出了一种自动化方法,通过引入PICOE(种群,干预,比较,比较,结果和效果)框架来提取正面和负面的临床研究结果,以代表随机对照试验(RCT)报告,其中E指示了特定的I和O之间的效果。我们开发了一种从自然语言中提取并分配相应的统计效应的管道,以从天然I-O配对中提取相应的统计效果。提取模型通过两轮训练实现了ICO和E描述性词提取的高度准确性。通过定义p值的阈值,我们发现在所有Covid-19相关的干预措施与统计测试对配对中,负结果占接近40%。我们认为,这一观察值是值得注意的,因为它们是从已发表的文献中提取的,在该文献中,有报告偏见的固有风险,宁愿报告积极的结果而不是负面结果。我们通过区分负面结果和阳性结果,提供了一种系统地了解当前临床证据水平的工具。
Failure is common in clinical trials since the successful failures presented in negative results always indicate the ways that should not be taken. In this paper, we proposed an automated approach to extracting positive and negative clinical research results by introducing a PICOE (Population, Intervention, Comparation, Outcome, and Effect) framework to represent randomized controlled trials (RCT) reports, where E indicates the effect between a specific I and O. We developed a pipeline to extract and assign the corresponding statistical effect to a specific I-O pair from natural language RCT reports. The extraction models achieved a high degree of accuracy for ICO and E descriptive words extraction through two rounds of training. By defining a threshold of p-value, we find in all Covid-19 related intervention-outcomes pairs with statistical tests, negative results account for nearly 40%. We believe that this observation is noteworthy since they are extracted from the published literature, in which there is an inherent risk of reporting bias, preferring to report positive results rather than negative results. We provided a tool to systematically understand the current level of clinical evidence by distinguishing negative results from the positive results.