Implementation and evaluation of an additional GPT-4-based reviewer in PRISMA-based medical systematic literature reviews
•GPT-4 API as a Complementary Reviewer: Novel integration method for systematic literature reviews, enhancing efficiency and rigor.•Feasibility and Reliability Evaluation: Assessing GPT-4′s potential as a primary screening tool in healthcare information retrieval.•Comprehensive Inter-rater Agreement...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of medical informatics (Shannon, Ireland) Ireland), 2024-09, Vol.189, p.105531, Article 105531 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | •GPT-4 API as a Complementary Reviewer: Novel integration method for systematic literature reviews, enhancing efficiency and rigor.•Feasibility and Reliability Evaluation: Assessing GPT-4′s potential as a primary screening tool in healthcare information retrieval.•Comprehensive Inter-rater Agreement Analysis: Utilizing Cohen’s kappa to assess agreement between human reviewers, GPT-4, and consensus, employing distinct methodologies for various parameter types.•Full-text Extraction Advancements: Overcoming limitations to extend AI-based reviewer capabilities in evidence synthesis.
PRISMA-based literature reviews require meticulous scrutiny of extensive textual data by multiple reviewers, which is associated with considerable human effort.
To evaluate feasibility and reliability of using GPT-4 API as a complementary reviewer in systematic literature reviews based on the PRISMA framework.
A systematic literature review on the role of natural language processing and Large Language Models (LLMs) in automatic patient-trial matching was conducted using human reviewers and an AI-based reviewer (GPT-4 API). A RAG methodology with LangChain integration was used to process full-text articles. Agreement levels between two human reviewers and GPT-4 API for abstract screening and between a single reviewer and GPT-4 API for full-text parameter extraction were evaluated.
An almost perfect GPT–human reviewer agreement in the abstract screening process (Cohen’s kappa > 0.9) and a lower agreement in the full-text parameter extraction were observed.
As GPT-4 has performed on a par with human reviewers in abstract screening, we conclude that GPT-4 has an exciting potential of being used as a main screening tool for systematic literature reviews, replacing at least one of the human reviewers. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1386-5056 1872-8243 1872-8243 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105531 |