Development of meta-prompts for Large Language Models to screen titles and abstracts for diagnostic test accuracy reviews
KATAOKA, Y.; So, R.; Banno, M.; Kumasawa, J.; Someko, H.; Taito, S.; Terasawa, T.; Tsujimoto, Y.; Tsutsumi, Y.; Wada, Y.; Furukawa, T. A.
Show abstract
Systematic reviews (SRs) are a critical component of evidence-based medicine, but the process of screening titles and abstracts is time-consuming. This study aimed to develop and externally validate a method using large language models to classify abstracts for diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic reviews, thereby reducing the human workload. We used a previously collected dataset for developing DTA abstract classifiers and applied prompt engineering. We developed an optimized meta-prompt for Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT)-3.5-turbo and GPT-4 to classify abstracts. In the external validation dataset 1, the prompt with GPT-3.5 turbo showed a sensitivity of 0.988, and a specificity of 0.298. GPT-4 showed a sensitivity of 0.982, and a specificity of 0.677. In the external validation dataset 2, GPT-3.5 turbo showed a sensitivity of 0.919, and a specificity of 0.434. GPT-4 showed a sensitivity of 0.806, and a specificity of 0.740. If we included eligible studies from among the references of the identified studies, GPT-3.5 turbo had no critical misses, while GPT-4 had some misses. Our study indicates that GPT-3.5 turbo can be effectively used to classify abstracts for DTA systematic reviews. Further studies using other dataset are warranted to confirm our results. Additionally, we encourage the use of our framework and publicly available dataset for further exploration of more effective classifiers using other LLMs and prompts (https://github.com/youkiti/ARE/). HightlightsO_ST_ABSWhat is already knownC_ST_ABS- Title and abstract screening in systematic reviews (SRs) consumes significant time. - Several attempts using machine learning to reduce this process in diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) SRs exist, but they have not yielded positive results in external validation. What is new- We aimed to develop and externally validate optimized meta-prompt for GPT-3.5-turbo and GPT-4 to classify abstracts for DTA SRs. - Through an iterative approach across three training datasets, an optimal meta-prompt capable of identifying DTA studies with remarkable sensitivity and specificity was developed. - The accuracy reproduced in the external validation datasets. Potential Impact for Readers- The developed meta-prompt can lessen the need for humans to read abstracts for DTA SRs, saving significant time and resources.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Catchii: empowering literature review screening in healthcare 96%
- Exploring the potential of Claude 2 for risk of bias assessment: Using a large language model to assess randomized controlled trials with RoB 2 95%
- Machine learning for identifying relevant publications in updates of systematic reviews of diagnostic test studies 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19-related research data availability and quality according to the FAIR principles: A meta-research study 95%
- An interactive retrieval system for clinical trial studies with context-dependent protocol elements 94%
- Protocol For Human Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in Clinical Consultations 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.