Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Mar 5, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Mar 6, 2018 - Apr 12, 2018
Date Accepted: May 12, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

A Deep Learning Method to Automatically Identify Reports of Scientifically Rigorous Clinical Research from the Biomedical Literature: Comparative Analytic Study

Del Fiol G, Michelson M, Iorio A, Cotoi C, Haynes RB

A Deep Learning Method to Automatically Identify Reports of Scientifically Rigorous Clinical Research from the Biomedical Literature: Comparative Analytic Study

J Med Internet Res 2018;20(6):e10281

DOI: 10.2196/10281

PMID: 29941415

PMCID: 6037944

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

A Deep Learning Method to Automatically Identify Reports of Scientifically Rigorous Clinical Research from the Biomedical Literature: Comparative Analytic Study

  • Guilherme Del Fiol; 
  • Matthew Michelson; 
  • Alfonso Iorio; 
  • Chris Cotoi; 
  • R Brian Haynes

Background:

A major barrier to the practice of evidence-based medicine is efficiently finding scientifically sound studies on a given clinical topic.

Objective:

To investigate a deep learning approach to retrieve scientifically sound treatment studies from the biomedical literature.

Methods:

We trained a Convolutional Neural Network using a noisy dataset of 403,216 PubMed citations with title and abstract as features. The deep learning model was compared with state-of-the-art search filters, such as PubMed’s Clinical Query Broad treatment filter, McMaster’s textword search strategy (no Medical Subject Heading, MeSH, terms), and Clinical Query Balanced treatment filter. A previously annotated dataset (Clinical Hedges) was used as the gold standard.

Results:

The deep learning model obtained significantly lower recall than the Clinical Queries Broad treatment filter (96.9% vs 98.4%; P<.001); and equivalent recall to McMaster’s textword search (96.9% vs 97.1%; P=.57) and Clinical Queries Balanced filter (96.9% vs 97.0%; P=.63). Deep learning obtained significantly higher precision than the Clinical Queries Broad filter (34.6% vs 22.4%; P<.001) and McMaster’s textword search (34.6% vs 11.8%; P<.001), but was significantly lower than the Clinical Queries Balanced filter (34.6% vs 40.9%; P<.001).

Conclusions:

Deep learning performed well compared to state-of-the-art search filters, especially when citations were not indexed. Unlike previous machine learning approaches, the proposed deep learning model does not require feature engineering, or time-sensitive or proprietary features, such as MeSH terms and bibliometrics. Deep learning is a promising approach to identifying reports of scientifically rigorous clinical research. Further work is needed to optimize the deep learning model and to assess generalizability to other areas, such as diagnosis, etiology, and prognosis.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Del Fiol G, Michelson M, Iorio A, Cotoi C, Haynes RB

A Deep Learning Method to Automatically Identify Reports of Scientifically Rigorous Clinical Research from the Biomedical Literature: Comparative Analytic Study

J Med Internet Res 2018;20(6):e10281

DOI: 10.2196/10281

PMID: 29941415

PMCID: 6037944

Per the author's request the PDF is not available.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.