
pmid: 27746703
pmc: PMC5065023
Systematic reviews underpin Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) by addressing precise clinical questions via comprehensive synthesis of all relevant published evidence. Authors of systematic reviews typically define a Population/Problem, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (a PICO criteria) of interest, and then retrieve, appraise and synthesize results from all reports of clinical trials that meet these criteria. Identifying PICO elements in the full-texts of trial reports is thus a critical yet time-consuming step in the systematic review process. We seek to expedite evidence synthesis by developing machine learning models to automatically extract sentences from articles relevant to PICO elements. Collecting a large corpus of training data for this task would be prohibitively expensive. Therefore, we derive distant supervision (DS) with which to train models using previously conducted reviews. DS entails heuristically deriving 'soft' labels from an available structured resource. However, we have access only to unstructured, free-text summaries of PICO elements for corresponding articles; we must derive from these the desired sentence-level annotations. To this end, we propose a novel method - supervised distant supervision (SDS) - that uses a small amount of direct supervision to better exploit a large corpus of distantly labeled instances by learning to pseudo-annotate articles using the available DS. We show that this approach tends to outperform existing methods with respect to automated PICO extraction.
570, 610
570, 610
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 51 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
