Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Using supervised machine learning classifiers to estimate likelihood of participating in clinical trials of a de-identified version of ResearchMatch
21
Zitationen
6
Autoren
2020
Jahr
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Lack of participation in clinical trials (CTs) is a major barrier for the evaluation of new pharmaceuticals and devices. Here we report the results of the analysis of a dataset from ResearchMatch, an online clinical registry, using supervised machine learning approaches and a deep learning approach to discover characteristics of individuals more likely to show an interest in participating in CTs. METHODS: We trained six supervised machine learning classifiers (Logistic Regression (LR), Decision Tree (DT), Gaussian Naïve Bayes (GNB), K-Nearest Neighbor Classifier (KNC), Adaboost Classifier (ABC) and a Random Forest Classifier (RFC)), as well as a deep learning method, Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), using a dataset of 841,377 instances and 20 features, including demographic data, geographic constraints, medical conditions and ResearchMatch visit history. Our outcome variable consisted of responses showing specific participant interest when presented with specific clinical trial opportunity invitations ('yes' or 'no'). Furthermore, we created four subsets from this dataset based on top self-reported medical conditions and gender, which were separately analysed. RESULTS: The deep learning model outperformed the machine learning classifiers, achieving an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.8105. CONCLUSIONS: The results show sufficient evidence that there are meaningful correlations amongst predictor variables and outcome variable in the datasets analysed using the supervised machine learning classifiers. These approaches show promise in identifying individuals who may be more likely to participate when offered an opportunity for a clinical trial.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects
2003 · 10.822 Zit.
SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials
2013 · 7.015 Zit.
Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials
1995 · 5.586 Zit.
The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research
2020 · 5.439 Zit.
The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines
2019 · 4.822 Zit.