Computational Review of Technology-Assisted Medical Evidence Synthesis through Human-LLM Collaboration: A Case Study of Cochrane
Ding, Y.; Jiang, X.; Akinseloyin, O.
Show abstract
Medical evidence synthesis, typically done by systematic reviews, requires extensive manual effort across stages such as searching, screening, extraction, and synthesis, making them slow and costly. These limitations hinder timely updates and rapid responses during health crises. Interests in technology-assisted evidence synthesis have been increasing, driven by artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs). In 2024, four major networks including the Cochrane, Campbell Collaboration, Joanna Briggs Institute and Collaboration for Environmental Evidence jointly launched an AI Methods Group to advance automation in evidence synthesis. This chapter presents a large-scale computational analysis of technology-assisted MES across 7,271 Cochrane reviews (2010- 2024), identifying computer tools--software, packages, or algorithmic implementations--used at different review stages via an LLM-human collaborative annotation pipeline. A multi-LLM mechanism combining suggestion, verification, and self-critical questioning achieved high-recall tool extraction. Evaluation against five "gold-standard" tool lists showed major gains: approximately 100 additional tools were identified compared to each existing review-based, database-based, and Cochrane-curated gold standards. Eventually, a list of in total 514 tools was compiled. Two annotators verified all candidates within two days, demonstrating notable efficiency. A follow-up bibliometric analysis provides the first computational map of technology use in Cochrane evidence synthesis, revealing trends across time, domains, and regions.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A Novel Question-Answering Framework for Automated Abstract Screening Using Large Language Models 96%
- Incorporating Preprints in Systematic Reviews: A Preliminary Study of a Novel Method for Rapid Evidence Synthesis 95%
- Automating literature screening and curation with applications to computational neuroscience 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of SURUS: a Named Entity Recognition System to Extract Knowledge from Interventional Study Records 95%
- Creating an Indexing Scheme for Case Series Articles 94%
- Investigator-initiated versus industry-sponsored trials – Visibility and relevance of randomized controlled trials in clinical practice guidelines (IMPACT) 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Ethical review of clinical research with generative AI: Evaluating ChatGPT’s accuracy and reproducibility 96%
- Diversity and inclusion: A hidden additional benefit of Open Data 93%
- The NASSS (Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability) framework use over time: A scoping review 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.