PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 3620734

Knowledge engineering for a clinical trial advice system: uncovering errors in protocol specification.

M A Musen·J A Rohn·L M Fagan·E H Shortliffe
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

ONCOCIN is an expert system that provides advice to physicians who are treating cancer patients enrolled in clinical trials. The process of encoding oncology protocol knowledge for the system has revealed serious omissions and unintentional ambiguities in the protocol documents. We have also discovered that many protocols allow for significant latitude in treating patients and that even when protocol guidelines are explicit, physicians often choose to apply their own judgment on the assumption that the specifications are incomplete. Computer-based tools offer the possibility of insuring completeness and reproducibility in the definition of new protocols. One goal of our automated protocol authoring environment, called OPAL, is to help physicians develop protocols that are free of ambiguity and thus to assure better compliance and standardization of care.

Explore related subjects

Clinical Trials as TopicHumansNeoplasmsRandom AllocationResearch DesignTherapy, Computer-AssistedJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M A Musen, J A Rohn, L M Fagan, E H Shortliffe. 1987. Knowledge engineering for a clinical trial advice system: uncovering errors in protocol specification.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3620734/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2001

Optimal two-stage designs for clinical trials based on safety and efficacy.

In clinical trials designed to evaluate treatment efficacy, it is common practice to terminate a treatment arm in which the observed rate of an adverse event is unacceptably high. This practice may be formalized by a group-sequential test based on a multivariate outcome including both adverse and efficacy events. Recently, Thall and Cheng proposed a family of tests for randomized trials of an experimental treatment versus a standard where patient outcome is bivariate with entries characterizing efficacy and safety. The test is motivated by the idea that clinically meaningful improvements over the standard may be characterized by a two-dimensional parameter quantifying trade-offs between efficacy and safety. We provide optimal two-stage designs based on this test that minimize either the mean sample size under the null hypothesis of no treatment difference, or the maximum sample size if the trial continues to a second stage. A more general group-sequential version of the design also is described, an illustration is provided, and application to the special case of single-arm phase II trials is discussed.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗