LitAutoScreener: Development and Validation of an Automated Literature Screening Tool in Evidence-Based Medicine Driven by Large Language Models

<b>Background:</b> The traditional manual literature screening approach is limited by its time-consuming nature and high labor costs. A pressing issue is how to leverage large language models to enhance the efficiency and quality of evidence-based evaluations of drug efficacy and safety. <b>Methods:</b> This study utilized a manually curated reference literature database-comprising vaccine, hypoglycemic agent, and antidepressant evaluation studies-previously developed by our team through conventional systematic review methods. This validated database served as the gold standard for the development and optimization of LitAutoScreener. Following the PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study Design) principles, a chain-of-thought reasoning approach with few-shot learning prompts was implemented to develop the screening algorithm. We subsequently evaluated the performance of LitAutoScreener using 2 independent validation cohorts, assessing both classification accuracy and processing efficiency. <b>Results:</b> For respiratory syncytial virus vaccine safety validation title-abstract screening, our tools based on GPT (GPT-4o), Kimi (moonshot-v1-128k), and DeepSeek (deepseek-chat 2.5) demonstrated high accuracy in inclusion/exclusion decisions (99.38%, 98.94%, and 98.85%, respectively). Recall rates were 100.00%, 99.13%, and 98.26%, with statistically significant performance differences (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> = 5.99, <i>P</i> = 0.048), where GPT outperformed the other models. Exclusion reason concordance rates were 98.85%, 94.79%, and 96.47% (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> = 30.22, <i>P</i> < 0.001). In full-text screening, all models maintained perfect recall (100.00%), with accuracies of 100.00% (GPT), 100.00% (Kimi), and 99.45% (DeepSeek). Processing times averaged 1 to 5 s per article for title-abstract screening and 60 s for full-text processing (including PDF preprocessing). <b>Conclusions:</b> LitAutoScreener offers a new approach for efficient literature screening in drug intervention studies, achieving high accuracy and significantly improving screening efficiency.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Data Science
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.34133/hds.0322
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.61
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

LitAutoScreener: Development and Validation of an Automated Literature Screening Tool in Evidence-Based Medicine Driven by Large Language Models

Feng Sun, Xuehu Li, Siyan Zhan, Yuan Tao et al.
2 citations
Health Data Science
Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
1.61
article

LitAutoScreener: Development and Validation of an Automated Literature Screening Tool in Evidence-Based Medicine Driven by Large Language Models

Feng Sun, Xuehu Li, Siyan Zhan, Yuan Tao, Seung Hee Yang, Zuhar Yisha
article en
2 citations

Abstract

<b>Background:</b> The traditional manual literature screening approach is limited by its time-consuming nature and high labor costs. A pressing issue is how to leverage large language models to enhance the efficiency and quality of evidence-based evaluations of drug efficacy and safety. <b>Methods:</b> This study utilized a manually curated reference literature database-comprising vaccine, hypoglycemic agent, and antidepressant evaluation studies-previously developed by our team through conventional systematic review methods. This validated database served as the gold standard for the development and optimization of LitAutoScreener. Following the PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study Design) principles, a chain-of-thought reasoning approach with few-shot learning prompts was implemented to develop the screening algorithm. We subsequently evaluated the performance of LitAutoScreener using 2 independent validation cohorts, assessing both classification accuracy and processing efficiency. <b>Results:</b> For respiratory syncytial virus vaccine safety validation title-abstract screening, our tools based on GPT (GPT-4o), Kimi (moonshot-v1-128k), and DeepSeek (deepseek-chat 2.5) demonstrated high accuracy in inclusion/exclusion decisions (99.38%, 98.94%, and 98.85%, respectively). Recall rates were 100.00%, 99.13%, and 98.26%, with statistically significant performance differences (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> = 5.99, <i>P</i> = 0.048), where GPT outperformed the other models. Exclusion reason concordance rates were 98.85%, 94.79%, and 96.47% (<i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> = 30.22, <i>P</i> < 0.001). In full-text screening, all models maintained perfect recall (100.00%), with accuracies of 100.00% (GPT), 100.00% (Kimi), and 99.45% (DeepSeek). Processing times averaged 1 to 5 s per article for title-abstract screening and 60 s for full-text processing (including PDF preprocessing). <b>Conclusions:</b> LitAutoScreener offers a new approach for efficient literature screening in drug intervention studies, achieving high accuracy and significantly improving screening efficiency.

Health Data ScienceVol. 5
Shihezi University (CN), Xinjiang Medical University (CN), Peking University (CN), Hainan University (CN), Ministry of Education (RO), Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence (CN), Ministry of Education (KR), Peking University Third Hospital (CN)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
1.61
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.