OP56 Comparing Large Language Models For Horizon Scanning: A Feature Assessment

Introduction Integrating large language models (LLMs) into horizon scanning workflows requires understanding of baseline features, like the ability to extract data and handle noisy data, and contextual understanding to inform considerations for LLM use. We evaluated 25 LLMs to assess their applicability for horizon scanning methods in general and to inform the design and integration strategy of our unit’s advanced horizon scanning system. Methods We developed a comprehensive framework detailing 32 features across 10 categories for 25 LLMs. To build this framework, we used ChatGPT-4 to generate a preliminary list of categories, features, and LLMs relevant to HS. We supplemented this with parameters from the 2024 LeewayHertz assessment and finalized it through team consensus. Next, we employed a human-in-the-loop approach utilizing a recursive prover-verifier-chain: Microsoft Copilot>Claude 3.5>ChatGPT-4. Each LLM was assessed for variations in baseline features impacting their applicability in horizon scanning methods and potential integration into our horizon scanning system. Results We identified six variable features (19%) across five categories. Nineteen of the LLMs support on-premises or self-hosted deployment. Regarding integration flexibility, only seven LLMs were open source and four lacked strong vendor support. Eighteen models offered a usage-based pricing system, allowing budget tailoring. Five LLMs excelled in handling noisy data, beneficial for horizon scanning methods dealing with diverse information sources. Seventeen models had multimodal capabilities. Conclusions Variations in key features among the 25 candidate LLMs affected their suitability for integration into horizon scanning workflows. Units must consider the trade-offs between deployment options, open-source availability, vendor support, pricing models, data handling capabilities, and multimodal features. This extensive framework supports assessment and selection of appropriate LLMs for horizon scanning workflows by filtering models according to these key features.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462325101141
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

OP56 Comparing Large Language Models For Horizon Scanning: A Feature Assessment

Hannah O’Keefe, Chris Marshall
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

OP56 Comparing Large Language Models For Horizon Scanning: A Feature Assessment

Hannah O’Keefe, Chris Marshall
article en

Abstract

Introduction Integrating large language models (LLMs) into horizon scanning workflows requires understanding of baseline features, like the ability to extract data and handle noisy data, and contextual understanding to inform considerations for LLM use. We evaluated 25 LLMs to assess their applicability for horizon scanning methods in general and to inform the design and integration strategy of our unit’s advanced horizon scanning system. Methods We developed a comprehensive framework detailing 32 features across 10 categories for 25 LLMs. To build this framework, we used ChatGPT-4 to generate a preliminary list of categories, features, and LLMs relevant to HS. We supplemented this with parameters from the 2024 LeewayHertz assessment and finalized it through team consensus. Next, we employed a human-in-the-loop approach utilizing a recursive prover-verifier-chain: Microsoft Copilot>Claude 3.5>ChatGPT-4. Each LLM was assessed for variations in baseline features impacting their applicability in horizon scanning methods and potential integration into our horizon scanning system. Results We identified six variable features (19%) across five categories. Nineteen of the LLMs support on-premises or self-hosted deployment. Regarding integration flexibility, only seven LLMs were open source and four lacked strong vendor support. Eighteen models offered a usage-based pricing system, allowing budget tailoring. Five LLMs excelled in handling noisy data, beneficial for horizon scanning methods dealing with diverse information sources. Seventeen models had multimodal capabilities. Conclusions Variations in key features among the 25 candidate LLMs affected their suitability for integration into horizon scanning workflows. Units must consider the trade-offs between deployment options, open-source availability, vendor support, pricing models, data handling capabilities, and multimodal features. This extensive framework supports assessment and selection of appropriate LLMs for horizon scanning workflows by filtering models according to these key features.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health CareVol. 41(S1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 38%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
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.

OP56 Comparing Large Language Models For Horizon Scanning: A Feature Assessment — Hannah O’Keefe, Chris Marshall · International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS