AI-driven evidence synthesis: data extraction of randomized controlled trials with large language models

被引:0
作者
Liu, Jiayi [1 ,2 ]
Lai, Honghao [1 ,2 ]
Zhao, Weilong [1 ,2 ]
Huang, Jiajie [3 ]
Xia, Danni [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Hui [4 ]
Luo, Xufei [4 ,5 ,6 ]
Wang, Bingyi [4 ]
Pan, Bei [4 ]
Hou, Liangying [4 ,7 ]
Chen, Yaolong [4 ,6 ,8 ]
Ge, Long [1 ,2 ,5 ]
ADVANCED Working Grp
机构
[1] Lanzhou Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Policy & Hlth Management, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[2] Lanzhou Univ, Evidence Based Social Sci Res Ctr, Sch Publ Hlth, 199 Donggang West Rd, Lanzhou 730000, Peoples R China
[3] Gansu Univ Chinese Med, Coll Nursing, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[4] Lanzhou Univ, Evidence Based Med Ctr, Sch Basic Med Sci, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[5] Lanzhou Univ, Key Lab Evidence Based Med Gansu Prov, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[6] Lanzhou Univ, Chinese Acad Med Sci, Res Unit Evidence Based Evaluat & Guidelines, Sch Basic Med Sci,2021RU017, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[7] McMaster Univ, Dept Hlth Res Methods Evidence & Impact, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[8] WHO Collaborating Ctr Guideline Implementat & Know, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
data extraction; evidence synthesis; large language models; randomized controlled trials;
D O I
10.1097/JS9.0000000000002215
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
The advancement of large language models (LLMs) presents promising opportunities to enhance evidence synthesis efficiency, particularly in data extraction processes, yet existing prompts for data extraction remain limited, focusing primarily on commonly used items without accommodating diverse extraction needs. This research letter developed structured prompts for LLMs and evaluated their feasibility in extracting data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Using Claude (Claude-2) as the platform, we designed comprehensive structured prompts comprising 58 items across six Cochrane Handbook domains and tested them on 10 randomly selected RCTs from published Cochrane reviews. The results demonstrated high accuracy with an overall correct rate of 94.77% (95% CI: 93.66% to 95.73%), with domain-specific performance ranging from 77.97% to 100%. The extraction process proved efficient, requiring only 88 seconds per RCT. These findings substantiate the feasibility and potential value of LLMs in evidence synthesis when guided by structured prompts, marking a significant advancement in systematic review methodology.
引用
收藏
页码:2722 / 2726
页数:5
相关论文
共 7 条
  • [1] Introduction to and techniques of evidence-based medicine
    Fisher, Charles G.
    Wood, Kirkham B.
    [J]. SPINE, 2007, 32 (19) : S66 - S72
  • [2] Measuring the Impact of AI in the Diagnosis of Hospitalized Patients A Randomized Clinical Vignette Survey Study
    Jabbour, Sarah
    Fouhey, David
    Shepard, Stephanie
    Valley, Thomas S.
    Kazerooni, Ella A.
    Banovic, Nikola
    Wiens, Jenna
    Sjoding, Michael W.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2023, 330 (23): : 2275 - 2284
  • [3] Automating data extraction in systematic reviews: A systematic review
    Jonnalagadda S.R.
    Goyal P.
    Huffman M.D.
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 4 (1)
  • [4] Assessing the Risk of Bias in Randomized Clinical Trials With Large Language Models
    Lai, Honghao
    Ge, Long
    Sun, Mingyao
    Pan, Bei
    Huang, Jiajie
    Hou, Liangying
    Yang, Qiuyu
    Liu, Jiayi
    Liu, Jianing
    Ye, Ziying
    Xia, Danni
    Zhao, Weilong
    Wang, Xiaoman
    Liu, Ming
    Talukdar, Jhalok Ronjan
    Tian, Jinhui
    Yang, Kehu
    Estill, Janne
    [J]. JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2024, 7 (05) : E2412687
  • [5] The use of ChatGPT in medical research: do we need a reporting guideline?
    Luo, Xufei
    Estill, Janne
    Chen, Yaolong
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2023, 109 (12) : 3750 - 3751
  • [6] Manchikanti L, 2008, PAIN PHYSICIAN, V11, P161
  • [7] training.cochrane, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions | Cochrane Training