Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Information Extraction of Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2006.07296 v6 pith:5432ROUN submitted 2020-06-12 cs.CL

Information Extraction of Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria

classification cs.CL
keywords criteriaextractioneligibilityknowledgesystemtrialsbaseclinical
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Clinical trials predicate subject eligibility on a diversity of criteria ranging from patient demographics to food allergies. Trials post their requirements as semantically complex, unstructured free-text. Formalizing trial criteria to a computer-interpretable syntax would facilitate eligibility determination. In this paper, we investigate an information extraction (IE) approach for grounding criteria from trials in ClinicalTrials(dot)gov to a shared knowledge base. We frame the problem as a novel knowledge base population task, and implement a solution combining machine learning and context free grammar. To our knowledge, this work is the first criteria extraction system to apply attention-based conditional random field architecture for named entity recognition (NER), and word2vec embedding clustering for named entity linking (NEL). We release the resources and core components of our system on GitHub at https://github.com/facebookresearch/Clinical-Trial-Parser. Finally, we report our per module and end to end performances; we conclude that our system is competitive with Criteria2Query, which we view as the current state-of-the-art in criteria extraction.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. $\texttt{AMEND++}$: Benchmarking Eligibility Criteria Amendments in Clinical Trials

    cs.CL 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0

    Initial eligibility-criteria text is weakly predictive of later protocol amendments, and a change-aware masked-language-modeling pretraining step improves prediction by about 1.4% relative AUROC.