Analysis reveals AI can enhance data extraction and screening accuracy in systematic literature reviews, indicating potential efficiency gains for health research.
Background Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) are critical to health research and decision-making but are often time- and labor-intensive. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools like large language models (LLMs) provide a promising way to automate these processes. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review on the cost-effectiveness of adult pneumococcal vaccination and prospectively assessed the performance of our AI-assisted review platform, Intelligent Systematic Literature Review (ISLaR) 2.0, compared to expert researchers. Results ISLaR demonstrated high accuracy (0.87 full-text screening; 0.86 data extraction), precision (0.88; 0.86), and sensitivity (0.91; 0.98) in article screening and data extraction tasks, but lower specificity (0.79; 0.42), especially when extracting data from tables. The platform reduced abstract and full-text screening time by over 90% compared to human reviewers. Conclusion The platform has strong potential to reduce reviewer workload but requires further development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cassell et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: