Skip to main content
Cornell University
We gratefully acknowledge support from the Simons Foundation, member institutions, and all contributors. Donate
arxiv logo > cs > arXiv:2409.04600

Help | Advanced Search

arXiv logo
Cornell University Logo

quick links

  • Login
  • Help Pages
  • About

Computer Science > Digital Libraries

arXiv:2409.04600 (cs)
[Submitted on 6 Sep 2024]

Title:The emergence of Large Language Models (LLM) as a tool in literature reviews: an LLM automated systematic review

Authors:Dmitry Scherbakov, Nina Hubig, Vinita Jansari, Alexander Bakumenko, Leslie A. Lenert
View a PDF of the paper titled The emergence of Large Language Models (LLM) as a tool in literature reviews: an LLM automated systematic review, by Dmitry Scherbakov and 4 other authors
View PDF
Abstract:Objective: This study aims to summarize the usage of Large Language Models (LLMs) in the process of creating a scientific review. We look at the range of stages in a review that can be automated and assess the current state-of-the-art research projects in the field. Materials and Methods: The search was conducted in June 2024 in PubMed, Scopus, Dimensions, and Google Scholar databases by human reviewers. Screening and extraction process took place in Covidence with the help of LLM add-on which uses OpenAI gpt-4o model. ChatGPT was used to clean extracted data and generate code for figures in this manuscript, ChatGPT and this http URL were used in drafting all components of the manuscript, except the methods and discussion sections. Results: 3,788 articles were retrieved, and 172 studies were deemed eligible for the final review. ChatGPT and GPT-based LLM emerged as the most dominant architecture for review automation (n=126, 73.2%). A significant number of review automation projects were found, but only a limited number of papers (n=26, 15.1%) were actual reviews that used LLM during their creation. Most citations focused on automation of a particular stage of review, such as Searching for publications (n=60, 34.9%), and Data extraction (n=54, 31.4%). When comparing pooled performance of GPT-based and BERT-based models, the former were better in data extraction with mean precision 83.0% (SD=10.4), and recall 86.0% (SD=9.8), while being slightly less accurate in title and abstract screening stage (Maccuracy=77.3%, SD=13.0). Discussion/Conclusion: Our LLM-assisted systematic review revealed a significant number of research projects related to review automation using LLMs. The results looked promising, and we anticipate that LLMs will change in the near future the way the scientific reviews are conducted.
Comments: 18 main pages with 5 figures and 1 table, references, followed by supplementary materials
Subjects: Digital Libraries (cs.DL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2409.04600 [cs.DL]
  (or arXiv:2409.04600v1 [cs.DL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.04600
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
Journal reference: Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2025 May 7:ocaf063
Related DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf063
DOI(s) linking to related resources

Submission history

From: Dmitry Scherbakov PhD [view email]
[v1] Fri, 6 Sep 2024 20:12:57 UTC (2,262 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled The emergence of Large Language Models (LLM) as a tool in literature reviews: an LLM automated systematic review, by Dmitry Scherbakov and 4 other authors
  • View PDF
  • Other Formats
license icon view license
Current browse context:
cs.DL
< prev   |   next >
new | recent | 2024-09
Change to browse by:
cs
cs.AI

References & Citations

  • NASA ADS
  • Google Scholar
  • Semantic Scholar
a export BibTeX citation Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

×
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy logo Reddit logo

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
  • Author
  • Venue
  • Institution
  • Topic

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
  • About
  • Help
  • contact arXivClick here to contact arXiv Contact
  • subscribe to arXiv mailingsClick here to subscribe Subscribe
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Web Accessibility Assistance
  • arXiv Operational Status
    Get status notifications via email or slack