Landis, S. C. et al. A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature. 490(7419), 187–191 (2012).Article
ADS
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Glasziou, P. et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. The Lancet. 383(9913), 267–276 (2014).Article
Google Scholar
Iqbal, S. A., Wallach, J. D., Khoury, M. J., Schully, S. D. & Ioannidis, J. P. Reproducible research practices and transparency across the biomedical literature. PLoS Biol. 14(1), e1002333 (2016).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Chalmers, I. & Glasziou, P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. The Lancet. 374(9683), 86–89 (2009).Article
Google Scholar
Simera, I. et al. Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: Reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network. BMC Medicine. 8(1), 24 (2010).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G. & Moher, D. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 340, c332 (2010).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Von Elm, E. et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Bullet. World Health Organ. 85, 867–872 (2007).Article
Google Scholar
Page, M. J. et al. statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021, 372 (2020).
Google Scholar
Chan, A. W. et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: Defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann. Internal Med. 158(3), 200–207 (2013).Article
Google Scholar
Shamseer, L., Hopewell, S., Altman, D. G., Moher, D. & Schulz, K. F. Update on the endorsement of CONSORT by high impact factor journals: A survey of journal “instructions to authors” in 2014. Trials. 17(1), 301 (2016).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Samaan, Z. et al. A systematic scoping review of adherence to reporting guidelines in health care literature. J. Multidisciplinary Healthcare. 6, 169-88 (2013).
Google Scholar
Jin, Y. et al. Does the medical literature remain inadequately described despite having reporting guidelines for 21 years?–A systematic review of reviews: An update. J. Multidiscip. Healthc. 11, 495–510 (2018).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Moher, D. et al. Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010, 340 (2010).
Google Scholar
Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman D, Weeks L, Peters J, Kober T, et al. Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2012; (11).Kilicoglu, H. et al. Methodology reporting improved over time in 176,469 randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 162, 19–28 (2023).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hopewell, S., Ravaud, P., Baron, G. & Boutron, I. Effect of editors’ implementation of CONSORT guidelines on the reporting of abstracts in high impact medical journals: Interrupted time series analysis. BMJ. 344, 4178 (2012).Article
Google Scholar
Pandis, N., Shamseer, L., Kokich, V. G., Fleming, P. S. & Moher, D. Active implementation strategy of CONSORT adherence by a dental specialty journal improved randomized clinical trial reporting. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 67(9), 1044–1048 (2014).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Kilicoglu, H. Biomedical text mining for research rigor and integrity: Tasks, challenges, directions. Brief. Bioinformat. 19(6), 1400–1414 (2018).
Google Scholar
Weissgerber, T. et al. Automated screening of COVID-19 preprints: Can we help authors to improve transparency and reproducibility?. Nat. Med. 27(1), 6–7 (2021).Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Schulz, R. et al. Is the future of peer review automated?. BMC Res. Notes. 15(1), 1–5 (2022).Article
Google Scholar
Kilicoglu, H. et al. Toward assessing clinical trial publications for reporting transparency. J. Biomed. Inform. 116, 103717 (2021).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Hoang L, Jiang L, Kilicoglu H. Investigating the impact of weakly supervised data on text mining models of publication transparency: a case study on randomized controlled trials. In: AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. vol. 2022. American Medical Informatics Association; 2022. p. 254.Luo, R. et al. BioGPT: generative pre-trained transformer for biomedical text generation and mining. Brief. Bioinformat. 23(6), 409 (2022).Article
Google Scholar
Devlin J, Chang MW, Lee K, Toutanova K. BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) 2019 (pp. 4171–4186).Wei J, Zou K. EDA: Easy Data Augmentation Techniques for Boosting Performance on Text Classification Tasks. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP) 2019 (pp. 6382–6388).Kang, T., Perotte, A., Tang, Y., Ta, C. & Weng, C. UMLS-based data augmentation for natural language processing of clinical research literature. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 28(4), 812–823 (2021).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Demner-Fushman, D. & Lin, J. Answering clinical questions with knowledge-based and statistical techniques. Comput. Linguist. 33(1), 63–103 (2007).Article
Google Scholar
Kiritchenko, S., De Bruijn, B., Carini, S., Martin, J. & Sim, I. ExaCT: Automatic extraction of clinical trial characteristics from journal publications. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Making. 10(1), 1–17 (2010).Article
Google Scholar
Kim, S. N., Martinez, D., Cavedon, L. & Yencken, L. Automatic classification of sentences to support evidence based medicine. BMC Bioinformatics. 12(2), 1–10 (2011).CAS
Google Scholar
Hassanzadeh, H., Groza, T. & Hunter, J. Identifying scientific artefacts in biomedical literature: The evidence based medicine use case. J. Biomed. Inform.. 49, 159–170 (2014).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Wallace, B. C., Kuiper, J., Sharma, A., Zhu, M. & Marshall, I. J. Extracting PICO sentences from clinical trial reports using supervised distant supervision. J. Mach. Learning Res. 17(1), 4572–4596 (2016).MathSciNet
Google Scholar
Nye B, Li JJ, Patel R, Yang Y, Marshall I, Nenkova A, Wallace BC. A Corpus with Multi-Level Annotations of Patients, Interventions and Outcomes to Support Language Processing for Medical Literature. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) 2018 (pp. 197–207).Brockmeier, A. J., Ju, M., Przybyła, P. & Ananiadou, S. Improving reference prioritisation with PICO recognition. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Making. 19(1), 1–14 (2019).Article
Google Scholar
Jin, D. & Szolovits, P. Advancing PICO element detection in biomedical text via deep neural networks. Bioinformatics. 36(12), 3856–3862 (2020).Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Marshall, I. J., Kuiper, J. & Wallace, B. C. RobotReviewer: Evaluation of a system for automatically assessing bias in clinical trials. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 23(1), 193–201 (2016).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Millard, L. A., Flach, P. A. & Higgins, J. P. Machine learning to assist risk-of-bias assessments in systematic reviews. Int. J. Epidemiol. 45(1), 266–277 (2016).Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Marshall, I. J. et al. Trialstreamer: A living, automatically updated database of clinical trial reports. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 27(12), 1903–1912 (2020).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Dernoncourt F, Lee JY, Szolovits P. Neural networks for joint sentence classification in medical paper abstracts. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 2, Short Papers 2017 (pp. 694–700).Jin D, Szolovits P. Hierarchical neural networks for sequential sentence classification in medical scientific abstracts. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing 2018 (pp. 3100–3109).Li X, Burns G, Peng N. Scientific discourse tagging for evidence extraction. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume 2021 (pp. 2550–2562).Hoang L, Guan Y, Kilicoglu H. Methodological information extraction from randomized controlled trial publications: a pilot study. In AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings, vol. 2022. (Vol. 2022, p. 542–551). American Medical Informatics Association.Hsu W, Speier W, Taira RK. Automated extraction of reported statistical analyses: towards a logical representation of clinical trial literature. In AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings. vol. 2012. American Medical Informatics Association; 2012. p. 350–359.Kilicoglu, H., Rosemblat, G., Malički, M. & ter Riet, G. Automatic recognition of self-acknowledged limitations in clinical research literature. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 25(7), 855–861 (2018).Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Lee, J. et al. BioBERT: A pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining. Bioinformatics. 36(4), 1234–1240 (2020).Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, et al. Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; 2017. p. 5998–6008.Radford, A. et al. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog. 1(8), 9 (2019).
Google Scholar
Brown, T. et al. Language models are few-shot learners. Adv. Neural Inform. Process. Syst. 33, 1877–1901 (2020).
Google Scholar
Chowdhery A, Narang S, Devlin J, Bosma M, Mishra G, Roberts A, et al. PaLM: Scaling language modeling with pathways. arXiv preprint arXiv:220402311. 2022.Touvron H, Lavril T, Izacard G, Martinet X, Lachaux MA, Lacroix T, et al. LLaMA: Open and efficient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:230213971. 2023.Zhao WX, Zhou K, Li J, Tang T, Wang X, Hou Y, et al. A survey of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:230318223. 2023.Singhal K, Tu T, Gottweis J, Sayres R, Wulczyn E, Hou L, et al. Towards expert-level medical question answering with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:230509617. 2023.Tian S, Jin Q, Yeganova L, Lai PT, Zhu Q, Chen X, et al. Opportunities and challenges for ChatGPT and large language models in biomedicine and health. arXiv preprint arXiv:230610070. 2023.Chen Q, Du J, Hu Y, Keloth VK, Peng X, Raja K, et al. Large language models in biomedical natural language processing: benchmarks, baselines, and recommendations. arXiv preprint arXiv:230516326. 2023.Wrightson JG, Blazey P, Khan KM, Ardern CL. GPT for RCTs?: Using AI to measure adherence to reporting guidelines. medRxiv. 2023:2023–12.Gu, Y. et al. Domain-specific language model pretraining for biomedical natural language processing. ACM Trans. Comput. Healthc (HEALTH). 3(1), 1–23 (2021).CAS
Google Scholar
Cohan A, Beltagy I, King D, Dalvi B, Weld DS. Pretrained language models for sequential sentence classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:190904054. 2019.Pan F, Canim M, Glass M, Gliozzo A, Fox P. CLTR: An End-to-End, Transformer-Based System for Cell-Level Table Retrieval and Table Question Answering. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations 2021 (pp. 202–209).Nov, O. et al. Putting ChatGPT’s medical advice to the (Turing) test: Survey study. JMIR Med. Edu. 9(1), e46939 (2023).Article
Google Scholar
Dai H, Liu Z, Liao W, Huang X, Cao Y, Wu Z, et al. AugGPT: Leveraging ChatGPT for text data augmentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:230213007. 2023.Bodenreider, O. The unified medical language system (UMLS): Integrating biomedical terminology. Nucl. Acids Res. 32(suppl1), D267-70 (2004).Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Ripple, A. M., Mork, J. G., Knecht, L. S. & Humphreys, B. L. A retrospective cohort study of structured abstracts in MEDLINE, 1992–2006. J. Med. Library Assoc. JMLA. 99(2), 160 (2011).Article
Google Scholar
McNemar, Q. Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika. 12(2), 153–157 (1947).Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Gillick L, Cox SJ. Some statistical issues in the comparison of speech recognition algorithms. In International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 1989 (pp. 532–535). IEEE.Wu C, Zhang X, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Xie W. PMC-LLaMA: Further finetuning LLaMA on medical papers. arXiv preprint arXiv:230414454. 2023.Tang R, Han X, Jiang X, Hu X. Does synthetic data generation of LLMs help clinical text mining? arXiv preprint arXiv:230304360. 2023.