Abstract
Clinical trials often fail on recruiting an adequate number of appropriate patients. Identifying eligible trial participants is a resource-intensive task when relying on manual review of clinical notes, particularly in critical care settings where the time window is short. Automated review of electronic health records has been explored as a way of identifying trial participants, but much of the information is in unstructured free text rather than a computable form. We developed an electronic health record pipeline that combines structured electronic health record data with free text in order to simulate recruitment into the LeoPARDS trial. We applied an algorithm to identify eligible patients using a moving 1-hour time window, and compared the set of patients identified by our approach with those actually screened and recruited for the trial. We manually reviewed clinical records for a random sample of additional patients identified by the algorithm but not identified for screening in the original trial. Our approach identified 308 patients, of whom 208 were screened in the actual trial. We identified all 40 patients with CCHIC data available who were actually recruited to LeoPARDS in our centre. The algorithm identified 96 patients on the same day as manual screening and 62 patients one or two days earlier. Analysis of electronic health records incorporating natural language processing tools could effectively replicate recruitment in a critical care trial, and identify some eligible patients at an earlier stage. If implemented in real-time this could improve the efficiency of clinical trial recruitment.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) Clinical and Research Informatics Unit (CRIU), NIHR Health Informatics Collaborative (HIC), and by awards establishing the Institute of Health Informatics at University College London (UCL). This study was funded Health Data Research UK (grant No. LOND1), which is funded by the UK Medical Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Department of Health and Social Care (England), Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government), Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland), British Heart Foundation and Wellcome Trust. ADS is supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from THIS Institute.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Not Applicable
Any clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Data Availability
Patient data analysed for this project was extracted from the Critical Care Health Informatics Collaboration research database, which has had National Research Ethics Service approval (14/LO/1031). Individual participant consent was not required, as section 251 exemption was granted by the Confidentiality Advisory Group of the Health Research Authority.
