Trial Factors Associated With Completion of Clinical Trials Evaluating AI: Retrospective Case-Control Study

BackgroundEvaluation of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in clinical trials remains the gold standard for translation into clinical settings. However, design factors associated with successful trial completion and the common reasons for trial failure are unknown. ObjectiveThis study aims to compar...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: David Chen (Author), Christian Cao (Author), Robert Kloosterman (Author), Rod Parsa (Author), Srinivas Raman (Author)
Format: Book
Published: JMIR Publications, 2024-09-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_c99a18d44cdf4c7b9a1bf9082e24bf65
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a David Chen  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Christian Cao  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Robert Kloosterman  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Rod Parsa  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Srinivas Raman  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Trial Factors Associated With Completion of Clinical Trials Evaluating AI: Retrospective Case-Control Study 
260 |b JMIR Publications,   |c 2024-09-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 1438-8871 
500 |a 10.2196/58578 
520 |a BackgroundEvaluation of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in clinical trials remains the gold standard for translation into clinical settings. However, design factors associated with successful trial completion and the common reasons for trial failure are unknown. ObjectiveThis study aims to compare trial design factors of complete and incomplete clinical trials testing AI tools. We conducted a case-control study of complete (n=485) and incomplete (n=51) clinical trials that evaluated AI as an intervention of ClinicalTrials.gov. MethodsTrial design factors, including area of clinical application, intended use population, and intended role of AI, were extracted. Trials that did not evaluate AI as an intervention and active trials were excluded. The assessed trial design factors related to AI interventions included the domain of clinical application related to organ systems; intended use population for patients or health care providers; and the role of AI for different applications in patient-facing clinical workflows, such as diagnosis, screening, and treatment. In addition, we also assessed general trial design factors including study type, allocation, intervention model, masking, age, sex, funder, continent, length of time, sample size, number of enrollment sites, and study start year. The main outcome was the completion of the clinical trial. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI values were calculated for all trial design factors using propensity-matched, multivariable logistic regression. ResultsWe queried ClinicalTrials.gov on December 23, 2023, using AI keywords to identify complete and incomplete trials testing AI technologies as a primary intervention, yielding 485 complete and 51 incomplete trials for inclusion in this study. Our nested propensity-matched, case-control results suggest that trials conducted in Europe were significantly associated with trial completion when compared with North American trials (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.14-7.10; P=.03), and the trial sample size was positively associated with trial completion (OR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.00; P=.02). ConclusionsOur case-control study is one of the first to identify trial design factors associated with completion of AI trials and catalog study-reported reasons for AI trial failure. We observed that trial design factors positively associated with trial completion include trials conducted in Europe and sample size. Given the promising clinical use of AI tools in health care, our results suggest that future translational research should prioritize addressing the design factors of AI clinical trials associated with trial incompletion and common reasons for study failure. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Computer applications to medicine. Medical informatics 
690 |a R858-859.7 
690 |a Public aspects of medicine 
690 |a RA1-1270 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Journal of Medical Internet Research, Vol 26, p e58578 (2024) 
787 0 |n https://www.jmir.org/2024/1/e58578 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1438-8871 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/c99a18d44cdf4c7b9a1bf9082e24bf65  |z Connect to this object online.