PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - van IJzendoorn, David G P
AU  - Habets, Philippe C
AU  - Vinkers, Christiaan H
AU  - Otte, Willem M
TI  - Clinical study type classification, validation, and PubMed filter comparison with natural language processing and active learning
AID  - 10.1101/2022.11.01.22281685
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.11.01.22281685
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/11/03/2022.11.01.22281685.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/11/03/2022.11.01.22281685.full
AB  - Each day, many thousands of new studies are published. Identifying specific study types with high sensitivity and specificity may improve searchability and accelerate updating systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Machine learning transformer models could facilitate this identification process if sufficient training data is available.We used an active learning strategy to construct a large training set (n=50,000) and fine-tuned the PubMedBERT language model to classify PubMed abstracts as randomized controlled trials, human studies, systematic reviews with and without meta-analyses, protocols, and rodent studies. In an external dataset (n=5,000), the average sensitivity and specificity across study types were 0.94 and 0.96, respectively. PubMed’s internal filters had a low sensitivity for both systematic reviews with meta-analysis (0.175, CI: 0.057–0.293) and randomized controlled trials (0.256, CI: 0.119–0.393). We applied this labeling to all 34 million PubMed abstracts currently available and provide the results within an online meta-information platform (EvidenceHunt).In conclusion, we show that study type classification in PubMed is opportune, given the available language models. The high accuracy in this study invites extending these models to more elaborate and hierarchical identification schemes.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors https://evidencehunt.com/