Retrieval-to-abstraction LLM-assisted literature synthesis: Case demonstrations in digital health technology-enabled randomized controlled trial outcome reporting.

IF 7.7
PLOS digital health Pub Date : 2026-10-09 eCollection Date: 2026-10-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pdig.0001768
Taylor B Harrison, Dian Hu, Heling Jia, Shyang Hong Tan, Fang Chen, Zhongyu Zhang, Qiuhao Lu, Jinlian Wang, Liwei Wang, Ming Huang, Larry J Prokop, Matt Hoy, Jennifer St Sauver, Sunyang Fu, Hongfang Liu
{"title":"Retrieval-to-abstraction LLM-assisted literature synthesis: Case demonstrations in digital health technology-enabled randomized controlled trial outcome reporting.","authors":"Taylor B Harrison, Dian Hu, Heling Jia, Shyang Hong Tan, Fang Chen, Zhongyu Zhang, Qiuhao Lu, Jinlian Wang, Liwei Wang, Ming Huang, Larry J Prokop, Matt Hoy, Jennifer St Sauver, Sunyang Fu, Hongfang Liu","doi":"10.1371/journal.pdig.0001768","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) support evidence-based clinical advancement. Clinical trial reporting guidelines, including CONSORT, establish common data elements that support systematic synthesis of published trial outcomes. However, the rapid rise of digital health technologies presents new challenges for reporting guidelines, and substantial real-world reporting heterogeneity has been observed. Therefore, machine-assisted evaluation of reporting adherence offers a pathway for more agile information management to accommodate the diverse and disruptive nature of digital health technology-enabled RCTs. Here, we propose an accelerated retrieval-to-abstraction literature synthesis framework to conduct article screening, text and table data preprocessing, and full-text review using an unmodified pretrained large language model. We apply this methodology in two digital health technology-enabled RCT case studies evaluating adherence to technology and digital health equity guideline reporting items. Large language model performance was on par with inter-annotator agreement F1 scores (≥0.9) in both screening and information-extraction tasks. These findings support the scalability and rigor of accelerated evidence synthesis and demonstrate the importance of common reporting elements across digital health technology-enabled RCTs.</p>","PeriodicalId":74465,"journal":{"name":"PLOS digital health","volume":"5 10","pages":"e0001768"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13652274/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0001768","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) support evidence-based clinical advancement. Clinical trial reporting guidelines, including CONSORT, establish common data elements that support systematic synthesis of published trial outcomes. However, the rapid rise of digital health technologies presents new challenges for reporting guidelines, and substantial real-world reporting heterogeneity has been observed. Therefore, machine-assisted evaluation of reporting adherence offers a pathway for more agile information management to accommodate the diverse and disruptive nature of digital health technology-enabled RCTs. Here, we propose an accelerated retrieval-to-abstraction literature synthesis framework to conduct article screening, text and table data preprocessing, and full-text review using an unmodified pretrained large language model. We apply this methodology in two digital health technology-enabled RCT case studies evaluating adherence to technology and digital health equity guideline reporting items. Large language model performance was on par with inter-annotator agreement F1 scores (≥0.9) in both screening and information-extraction tasks. These findings support the scalability and rigor of accelerated evidence synthesis and demonstrate the importance of common reporting elements across digital health technology-enabled RCTs.

检索-抽象法学硕士辅助文献综合:数字健康技术支持的随机对照试验结果报告中的案例演示。
随机对照试验(rct)的系统评价支持循证临床进展。包括CONSORT在内的临床试验报告指南建立了支持已发表试验结果系统综合的共同数据要素。然而,数字卫生技术的迅速崛起对报告准则提出了新的挑战,并且已经观察到现实世界报告的巨大异质性。因此,机器辅助评估报告依从性为更灵活的信息管理提供了一条途径,以适应数字卫生技术支持的随机对照试验的多样性和破坏性。在这里,我们提出了一个加速检索到抽象的文献综合框架,使用未经修改的预训练大型语言模型进行文章筛选、文本和表数据预处理以及全文审查。我们在两个数字健康技术支持的随机对照试验案例研究中应用了这种方法,评估了对技术和数字健康公平指南报告项目的依从性。在筛选和信息提取任务中,大型语言模型的性能与注释者间协议F1分数(≥0.9)相当。这些发现支持了加速证据合成的可扩展性和严谨性,并证明了在数字卫生技术支持的随机对照试验中共同报告要素的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书