The role of machine learning in clinical research: transforming the future of evidence generation
Background Interest in the application of machine learning (ML) to the design, conduct, and analysis of clinical trials has grown, but the evidence base for such applications has not been surveyed. This manuscript reviews the proceedings of a multi-stakeholder conference to discuss the current and f...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Current controlled trials in cardiovascular medicine Vol. 22; no. 1; pp. 537 - 15 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
London
BioMed Central
16.08.2021
BioMed Central Ltd Springer Nature B.V BMC |
| Subjects: | |
| ISSN: | 1745-6215, 1745-6215 |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background
Interest in the application of machine learning (ML) to the design, conduct, and analysis of clinical trials has grown, but the evidence base for such applications has not been surveyed. This manuscript reviews the proceedings of a multi-stakeholder conference to discuss the current and future state of ML for clinical research. Key areas of clinical trial methodology in which ML holds particular promise and priority areas for further investigation are presented alongside a narrative review of evidence supporting the use of ML across the clinical trial spectrum.
Results
Conference attendees included stakeholders, such as biomedical and ML researchers, representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), artificial intelligence technology and data analytics companies, non-profit organizations, patient advocacy groups, and pharmaceutical companies. ML contributions to clinical research were highlighted in the pre-trial phase, cohort selection and participant management, and data collection and analysis. A particular focus was paid to the operational and philosophical barriers to ML in clinical research. Peer-reviewed evidence was noted to be lacking in several areas.
Conclusions
ML holds great promise for improving the efficiency and quality of clinical research, but substantial barriers remain, the surmounting of which will require addressing significant gaps in evidence. |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Correspondence-1 content type line 14 content type line 23 ObjectType-Review-2 |
| ISSN: | 1745-6215 1745-6215 |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s13063-021-05489-x |