Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 21, 2025

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
Published on: June 13, 2025
Synthesizing evidence from clinical trials with dynamic interactive argument trees
Olivia Sanchez-Graillet1, Christian Witte2, Frank Grimm2
1Semantic Computing Group, Cluster of Excellence Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC), Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, 33619, Germany. olivia.sanchez@uni-bielefeld.de.
Background:
Evidence-based medicine propagates that medical/clinical decisions are made by taking into account high-quality evidence, most notably in the form of randomized clinical trials. Evidence-based decision-making requires aggregating the evidence available in multiple trials to reach -by means of systematic reviews- a conclusive recommendation on which treatment is best suited for a given patient population. However, it is challenging to produce systematic reviews to keep up with the ever-growing number of published clinical trials. Therefore, new computational approaches are necessary to support the creation of systematic reviews that include the most up-to-date evidence.We propose a method to synthesize the evidence available in clinical trials in an ad-hoc and on-demand manner by automatically arranging such evidence in the form of a hierarchical argument that recommends a therapy as being superior to some other therapy along a number of key dimensions corresponding to the clinical endpoints of interest. The method has also been implemented as a web tool that allows users to explore the effects of excluding different points of evidence, and indicating relative preferences on the endpoints.
Results:
Through two use cases, our method was shown to be able to generate conclusions similar to the ones of published systematic reviews. To evaluate our method implemented as a web tool, we carried out a survey and usability analysis with medical professionals. The results show that the tool was perceived as being valuable, acknowledging its potential to inform clinical decision-making and to complement the information from existing medical guidelines.
Conclusions:
The method presented is a simple but yet effective argumentation-based method that contributes to support the synthesis of clinical trial evidence. A current limitation of the method is that it relies on a manually populated knowledge base. This problem could be alleviated by deploying natural language processing methods to extract the relevant information from publications.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials: Overview
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Deductive Reasoning
For example, a researcher can deduce specific predictions...
Reason and Intuition
Combined Effects of Drugs: Synergism
Such synergistic combinations...

