LLMs for thematic summarization in qualitative healthcare research: feasibility and insights.

JMIR AI Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.2196/64447
Arturo Castellanos, Haoqiang Jiang, Paulo Gomes, Debra Vander Meer, Alfred Castillo
{"title":"LLMs for thematic summarization in qualitative healthcare research: feasibility and insights.","authors":"Arturo Castellanos, Haoqiang Jiang, Paulo Gomes, Debra Vander Meer, Alfred Castillo","doi":"10.2196/64447","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The application of large language models (LLMs) in analyzing expert textual online data is a topic of growing importance in computational linguistics and qualitative research within healthcare settings.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study is to understand how large language models (LLMs) can help analyze expert textual data. Topic modeling enables scaling the thematic analysis of content of a large corpus of data, but it still requires interpretation. We investigate the use of LLMs to help researchers scale this interpretation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The primary methodological phases of this project were: (1) collecting data representing posts to an online nurse forum, as well as cleaning and pre-processing the data; (2) using LDA to derive topics; (3) using human categorization for topic modeling; (4) using LLMs to complement and scale the interpretation of thematic analysis. The purpose is to compare the outcomes of human interpretation with those derived from LLMs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There is substantial agreement (80%) between LLM and human interpretation. For two thirds of the topics, human evaluation and LLMs agree on alignment and convergence of themes. Moreover, LLM sub-themes offer depth of analysis within LDA topics, providing detailed explanations that align with and build upon established human themes. Nonetheless, LLMs identify coherence and complementarity where human evaluation does not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LLMs enable the automation of the interpretation task in qualitative research. There are challenges in the use of LLMs for evaluation of the resulting themes.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrial: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":73551,"journal":{"name":"JMIR AI","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR AI","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/64447","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The application of large language models (LLMs) in analyzing expert textual online data is a topic of growing importance in computational linguistics and qualitative research within healthcare settings.

Objective: The objective of this study is to understand how large language models (LLMs) can help analyze expert textual data. Topic modeling enables scaling the thematic analysis of content of a large corpus of data, but it still requires interpretation. We investigate the use of LLMs to help researchers scale this interpretation.

Methods: The primary methodological phases of this project were: (1) collecting data representing posts to an online nurse forum, as well as cleaning and pre-processing the data; (2) using LDA to derive topics; (3) using human categorization for topic modeling; (4) using LLMs to complement and scale the interpretation of thematic analysis. The purpose is to compare the outcomes of human interpretation with those derived from LLMs.

Results: There is substantial agreement (80%) between LLM and human interpretation. For two thirds of the topics, human evaluation and LLMs agree on alignment and convergence of themes. Moreover, LLM sub-themes offer depth of analysis within LDA topics, providing detailed explanations that align with and build upon established human themes. Nonetheless, LLMs identify coherence and complementarity where human evaluation does not.

Conclusions: LLMs enable the automation of the interpretation task in qualitative research. There are challenges in the use of LLMs for evaluation of the resulting themes.

Clinicaltrial:

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信