Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Clinical Trials: Overview01:11

Clinical Trials: Overview

3.4K
Clinical development focuses on how the drug will interact with the human body and encompasses four key phases of clinical trials, each serving a specific purpose in assessing the safety and effectiveness of new drugs. These phases overlap and build upon one another. Phase I involves a small group of healthy volunteers (typically 20-80 individuals) or, in cases where significant toxicity is expected, patients with the targeted disease, such as cancer or AIDS. The volunteers are tested for...
3.4K
Clinical Trials01:16

Clinical Trials

9.3K
Clinical trials are prospective experimental studies conducted on humans to determine the safety and efficacy of treatments, drugs, diet methods, and medical devices. Using statistics in clinical trials enables researchers to derive reasonable and accurate conclusions from the collected data, allowing them to make wise decisions in uncertain situations. In medical research, statistical methods are crucial for preventing errors and bias.
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
9.3K
Hazard Ratio01:12

Hazard Ratio

265
The hazard ratio (HR) is a widely used measure in clinical trials to compare the risk of events, such as death or disease recurrence, between two groups over time. It reflects the ratio of hazard rates—the instantaneous risk of the event occurring—between a treatment group and a control group. This measure provides valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of a treatment by assessing how the risk of an event differs between the two groups.
For example, in a clinical trial...
265
Deductive Reasoning01:16

Deductive Reasoning

60.0K
Deductive reasoning, or deduction, is the type of logic used in hypothesis-based science. In deductive reasoning, the pattern of thinking moves in the opposite direction as compared to inductive reasoning, which means that it uses a general principle or law to predict specific results. From those general principles, a scientist can deduce and predict the specific results that would be valid as long as the general principles are valid.
For example, a researcher can deduce specific predictions...
60.0K
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

6.9K
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the...
6.9K
Combined Effects of Drugs: Synergism01:27

Combined Effects of Drugs: Synergism

4.9K
Synergism is a useful mechanism where combining two or more drugs is more effective than each constituent used alone. Such combinations are also called supra-additive interactions. The drugs collectively enhance the final therapeutic effect by acting on different targets. Another advantage is that the low dose of each constituent drug is sufficient to achieve the desired effect. This helps reduce the duration of therapy and lower the adverse effects of these drugs.
Such synergistic combinations...
4.9K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

tmQM-RDF Data Set: A Knowledge Graph Representing Transition Metal Complexes.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same author

Development Process of a Clinical Decision Support System for Empiric Antibiotic Therapies in Patients With Sepsis: Case Study.

JMIR medical informatics·2026
Same author

Extracting Quality of Life Information of Patients Diagnosed With Breast Cancer From Health Care Online Forum Posts: Data Feasibility Study.

JMIR cancer·2026
Same author

Relevance of blood gas analysis in emergency medical services: an emergency physician's assessment.

Die Anaesthesiologie·2026
Same author

Best practices for the collection and analysis of patient experience data from social media for patient-focused drug development.

Frontiers in medicine·2026
Same author

Electrocardiogram sonification accelerates detection of ST elevation myocardial infarction compared to analysis based solely on visual display: a randomized controlled simulation study with medical students.

BMC emergency medicine·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 21, 2025

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
05:47

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems

Published on: June 13, 2025

596

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.

Journal of Biomedical Semantics
|June 6, 2022
PubMed
Summary

This study introduces a computational method to automatically synthesize clinical trial evidence for faster systematic reviews. The developed web tool aids medical professionals in comparing therapies and informing clinical decisions.

Keywords:
Aggregation of clinical trial evidenceArgument-based systemsEvidence synthesisSystematic review automation

More Related Videos

A Data Integration Workflow to Identify Drug Combinations Targeting Synthetic Lethal Interactions
07:40

A Data Integration Workflow to Identify Drug Combinations Targeting Synthetic Lethal Interactions

Published on: May 27, 2021

4.3K
Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
08:36

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

715

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 21, 2025

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
05:47

Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems

Published on: June 13, 2025

596
A Data Integration Workflow to Identify Drug Combinations Targeting Synthetic Lethal Interactions
07:40

A Data Integration Workflow to Identify Drug Combinations Targeting Synthetic Lethal Interactions

Published on: May 27, 2021

4.3K
Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
08:36

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment

Published on: April 19, 2024

715

Area of Science:

  • Medical Informatics
  • Clinical Epidemiology

Background:

  • Evidence-based medicine relies on high-quality evidence, primarily randomized clinical trials, for clinical decisions.
  • Systematic reviews aggregate trial evidence to recommend optimal treatments but struggle to keep pace with growing publications.
  • Computational approaches are needed to support timely systematic reviews with the latest evidence.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop a method for synthesizing clinical trial evidence on-demand.
  • To create a hierarchical argument structure for comparing therapies based on clinical endpoints.
  • To implement and evaluate a web tool for exploring synthesized evidence.

Main Methods:

  • An argumentation-based method was developed to synthesize evidence from clinical trials.
  • The method arranges evidence hierarchically to recommend superior therapies.
  • A web tool was implemented, allowing users to adjust evidence points and endpoint preferences.

Main Results:

  • The method successfully generated conclusions comparable to existing systematic reviews in two use cases.
  • A survey and usability analysis with medical professionals indicated the tool's value.
  • The tool was perceived as a valuable aid for clinical decision-making and complementing guidelines.

Conclusions:

  • The proposed argumentation-based method effectively supports the synthesis of clinical trial evidence.
  • A limitation is the reliance on a manually populated knowledge base.
  • Future work includes using natural language processing to automate information extraction from publications.